3. What assessment has the Counsel General made of the impact on Wales of the recently introduced Retained EU Law (Reform and Revocation) Bill? OQ58486

4. What assessment has the Counsel General made of the implications for Wales of the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill? OQ58493

Thank you for your question. A full copy of the Bill, including new policy content on the sunsetting of retained EU law, was only shared with Welsh Government officials less than 24 hours before its introduction on 22 September. We are giving the Bill due consideration to understand the impact on Wales.

I take it that that was said in the positive vein, and that you are actually going to be very positive about bringing more law here that we can all look at. Because as the Counsel General will know, Wales, along with the majority of the British people, voted unreservedly to leave the European Union—I nearly said 'onion' then—and to remove ourselves from the unelected and dysfunctional bureaucracy in Brussels. [Interruption.] The purpose of the Retained EU Law (Reform and Revocation) Bill is to begin to decide, of course, which parts of former EU law should be retained, and which should expire, in conjunction with the devolved administrations, as outlined by the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. This legislation was never intended to remain on the statute book permanently. Yet, I do feel that there seems to be some thought by you, Counsel General, that retaining laws introduced by an unelected bureaucracy in a foreign country is indeed preferable to having those laws reviewed by a democratically elected UK Government, of which—[Interruption.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer (David Rees) took the Chair.

You need to ask—. The Member needs to ask the question, and Members need to allow her to ask the question.

Thank you. Of which, whether you like it or not, Wales—

But you do need to ask the question, Janet. 

—Wales remains a very integral part. Can you confirm why there is this negativity? Diolch.

Well, can I start by saying that I suppose it's very clear that the Member hasn't read the legislation, otherwise she might have more concerns about the way in which it is proceeding?

The first part of it is to say that I had meetings with Mr Rees-Mogg before the change in Prime Minister, and I've had a recent meeting as well, specifically to discuss the Bill. The issues that I think concern us, first of all, are that what has now appeared—and it appears to be the result of a very unfortunate and ill-thought-out comment that was made during the Prime Ministerial leadership election—is that, suddenly, we would get rid of all this stuff by the end of December 2023, without any real consideration of what the implications of that were. So, that is something that is a major concern because there are 2,400 of these. We could be sitting non-stop, every hour, every second, every minute of the day for the next five years and we would not properly be able to consider 2,400 items of legislation.

Secondly, it does not deal also with the issue of devolved legislation. And, also, what it does not do is actually delineate what the aspects are of those 2,400. All we actually have is a schedule listing all those items. So, firstly, there is an enormous amount of work, which Scotland has also raised, I think, and we have raised, that actually has the potential to derail the whole legislative processes of the Scottish Government, the Welsh Government, and indeed the UK Government. So, it's most unfortunate that it is being presented in that particular way. Nevertheless, we will be looking at that to address how we might be able to deal with it. We have to do that. 

The second thing is that there is some provision for an extension of the sunset in certain areas. At the moment, that is only with the UK Government. So, we have made a number of very important points. Firstly, in respect of the power to extend, it should be one that Welsh Ministers should also have. We've also said that the power to assimilate, restate and revoke, clearly, will be something for Welsh Ministers as well. The ability to actually intervene in any legal proceedings where there's the issue of the status of EU law should also be with Welsh Ministers, both in respect of devolved legislation, but also UK legislation that has an impact on devolved responsibilities.

So, I suppose the other point as well is that, of course, we have an approach that is one where we actually want to know what the implications would be of point-blank revocation in terms of standards in so many areas. And the difficulty is, at this stage, that it is impossible to evaluate what all of those are.

So, having had the meeting with the Minister on 28 September, I've sought assurances. I can say that the meeting was very positive. I think there were very positive commitments that were expressed in respect of this not overturning any devolved powers or responsibilities; that we would be in a position to retain the legislation that we wished to retain; that any changes to legislation in devolved areas will remain with us. Now, as we know with the UK Government, I take that in the spirit in which it has been offered, and we'll wait to see what that means in detail.

But, whatever happens, what it does not do is get us away from the fact that this has an enormous cost in terms of legal resources. It'll have a financial cost, an enormous financial cost, and an enormous legal resource cost as well. We will certainly need to look at whether there are areas whereby—[Interruption.] 

I apologise.

I thought it was a timely fire alarm. 

So, there are very significant implications. With respect to the Member, I just want to say this: what you mustn't do is underestimate the actual impact, the actual challenge, the actual demand that this has. I think there are serious concerns across all the Governments and nations of the UK, in the various departments, even in the UK Government, as to how on earth this can actually be delivered within the timescale that is being suggested. Beware of promises that are made at haste and then repented at leisure.

My approach will be to ensure that, firstly, the promises that have been made in respect of devolved responsibilities are upheld. We will do everything we can to protect the standards that we consider are important within Wales, and this will be a matter that I will, obviously, be making further statements on in due course. Of course, it will engage very much the legislative consent process and also create an enormous amount of work for the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee.

That reminds us all that we need to check our phones are off or on silent before we enter the Chamber. [Laughter.] Huw Irranca-Davies.

Indeed, Dirprwy Lywydd. I don't know whose phone that was that went off, but clearly the Llywydd is going to have a word with them, I'm sure. 

Dirprwy Lywydd, can I just check, is this grouped?

Yes.

It is, thank you very much. Counsel General, the assurance you've given following the meeting you've recently had gives some quiet assurance to us that the UK Government is minded to tread very carefully on devolved competences in this area, but I know you've previously said that this Bill, if we get it wrong, could give UK Ministers unfettered authority to legislate in devolved areas, so it shows the criticality of getting that right and having real respect both up and down the M4 corridor. 

So, my query is this, Counsel General: you've just mentioned the workload—we like heavy workloads on our committee—with 2,400 pieces of legislation. We don't know which of those yet actually do trespass on devolved areas and which are within reserved competence. We're going to have to deal with them by the end of next year. Have you got any suggestions how we work that into our programme of work on top of everything else we're doing?

Can I perhaps start with the opening of your question, which is your statement that your committee enjoys heavy workloads, because that is something that will be emerging? It is a serious issue and I think we need to give it some very careful thought. We are giving careful thought to whether there are ways in which we can restate, for example, en bloc, legislation and then give us more time that way to do it.

The initial point that I raised, firstly, is that, obviously, we need to have the proper powers. There should be no intrusion into devolved powers. I've been given those assurances. Now, obviously, the devil is always in the detail in legislation, but it is a body of work that could be similar in scale to, and probably even larger than, that we had for the retained EU law in preparation for leaving the European Union. For that, you'll recall Welsh Government made over 75 correcting statutory instruments and consented to over 230 UK Government statutory instruments. Part of the difficulty is that we don't really know, and it is an enormous task just to evaluate those 2,400. The other thing is, of course, the point I've made, and that is the detrimental impact it may have on really important legislation that we are taking through this particular Chamber—Government Bills and also individual Member's Bills as well. 

Secondly, the other aspect is that, of course, one of the dangers of a wholesale revocation of legislation is you don't know what the unintended consequences are. Many pieces of legislation have all sorts of interdependencies, and we have to make sure we do our best to try and understand that, but the resource of doing that is basically resource that would be taken away from other areas. There were issues on deregulation. I was given an assurance that although this creates restrictions in terms of issues relating to regulatory burdens, which, I have to say, are defined in a very loose and equivocal way, it does does not actually prevent us from protecting through enforcement and through regulation those areas that we think are important when it comes to maintaining standards.

So, it's an ongoing piece of work. There will be a lot of considerations for your committee. The assurance that I give you is that, of course, I will do everything I can to work as closely as possible with the committee on this process as we go along, and we'll know more in due course.