4. Legislative Consent Motion on the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill

Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 2:51 pm on 22 November 2022.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Mick Antoniw Mick Antoniw Labour 2:51, 22 November 2022

Brexit was always going to require a border somewhere between the EU single market and the UK internal market, yet successive UK Governments that supported Brexit have naively and stubbornly refused to acknowledge this point. I of course accept that any agreement can be the subject of technical review and, indeed, the UK and the EU have entered into formal and informal discussions on technical changes to the protocol, and these must continue. Regrettably, the UK Government has decided that it needs to have powers through this Bill to make changes to the operation of the protocol in domestic law. It seems to believe that the existence of such powers gives it a stronger position in negotiating changes to the protocol with the European Commission, and yet 52 of the 90 Members of the Northern Ireland Assembly elected in May, from three parties, wrote in June to Prime Minister Johnson to oppose this Bill.

The UK Government's approach is tactically naive and politically inept. The UK Government's approach has real disastrous consequences for Wales and for the trade and co-operation agreement, which envisages the UK associating to the Horizon research programme. Its predecessor programmes have hugely benefited the Welsh and wider UK and European economies over decades. Many research programmes at Welsh universities have been funded through it, yet our continued participation in the round of programmes and funding that has already begun is now jeopardised through this Bill. The Commission has been unwilling to proceed with UK association to the programme, most likely because of the bad faith caused by the Bill. We, along with universities and businesses across the UK, have pressed them to reconsider their approach, but the ultimate cause is this Bill. 

Now, I'll address the specific arguments for not recommending consent. Firstly, the Bill may well, in all probability, breach international law. Notable legal scholars have commented that the UK Government's international law defence of necessity for breaching international obligations is not only weak, but even hopeless, as described by the former head of the UK Government's legal department. We are unwilling to recommend consent to a Bill that has the potential to breach international law on an unjustifiable basis. As set out in the memorandum, this has serious implications for Welsh Ministers' obligations to comply with the law, including international law and treaty obligations under the ministerial code. I note that the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee shares these concerns regarding the UK Government's position. In our opinion, it would be ethically and constitutionally wrong for this Government to recommend consent to legislation that is in itself potentially unlawful.

Secondly, many of the regulation-making powers drafted in the Bill are so broad that they lack any real clarity of purpose, and this has significant potential implications for Wales and for our devolution settlement, both in the sense that we cannot fully understand the nature and potential scope of the powers that could be conferred on Welsh Ministers, nor can we properly assess the extent to which Ministers of the Crown powers could be used to encroach on devolved matters. This is clearly not transparent, it is certainly not good law, and it's certainly a threat to fundamental constitutional principles and our devolution settlement. I note that the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee also shares concerns over the extremely wide delegated powers in this Bill.

Thirdly, I should reiterate that, yet again, the Welsh Government was given no role. We were given no role in the drafting of this Bill and, just as with the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 and the dreadful Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill, we disagree with the UK Government's tactical approach. It should continue constructive negotiations with the European Commission on the ongoing technical issues. I do not want the Welsh Government and the Senedd to be party to any further damage to the UK's international reputation. I'm pleased that all three Senedd committee reports on the memorandum, despite the relatively limited time for consideration, address concerns about the possible damage to UK-EU relations and stress the need for a negotiated settlement. I am grateful for their diligence and support and for the important work done to scrutinise the legislative consent memorandum and the Bill. Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd.