Sturgeon may take UK to court over post-brexit plan
●First Minister steps up Indyref push with attack on ‘power grab’ ●Uk-wide trade regulations vital for business, says Scottish Secretary ●John Major joins revolt over government ‘breaking the law’
Nicola Sturgeon has branded postBrexit plans to create a UK single market an “abomination” that will “cripple devolution”.
The First Minister warned that the UK’S government’s Internal Market Bill published yesterday will drive Scots to vote for independence as she ramped up the pressure for a second referendum.
The Scottish Government has not ruled out a legal challenge over the proposals. Former Tory prime minister Sir John Major joined criticism of the bill, which ministers have acknowledged will breach international law.
But the concerns have been played by down by Scottish Secretary Alister Jack, who said the changes will provide a “safety net” for UK businesses when the jurisdiction of the EU single market ends in the UK next year.
Writing in The Scots man today, Mr Jack insists the“overwhelming majority” of firms are behind the measures. Prime Minister Boris
Johnson has also said that the legislation will provide a tranche of new powers for Holyrood.
In a strongly-worded attack after the legislation was published yesterday, Ms Sturgeon said :“The Tories’ proposed bill for a so-called UK internal Market is an abomination. It is a naked power grab which would cripple devolution.
“The plan for mutual recognition of standards in reality means a race to the bottom when it comes to things like food standards and environmental protections.
“It would prevent the Scottish Parliament from effectively legislating in a whole range of areas, including laws covering the food people put on their tables, which is currently produced to high EU animal welfare and food safety standards.
“That could be undermined by Scotland having to accept lower standards set by a UK government in pursuit of a US or other trade deals – and could see us forced to accept chlorinated chicken.”
The bill aims to guarantee companies can trade unhindered in ever y part of the UK and replaces the provisions of the EU single market when the Brexit transition period ceases at the end of the year.
Brexit will see Holyrood and the other devolved nations handed new controls over areas such as animal welfare, food regulations and the environment. But there are fears that this may lead to new barriers to trade between different parts of the UK, prompting the need for “single market” rules.
The bill will come before the Scottish Parliament for legislative consent as it cuts across devolved areas, but this is likely to be rejected by MSPS. However, the UK government can press ahead without this.
Ms Sturgeon has pledged to “fiercely resist” the plans and called on all parties in Scotland to oppose the measures contained in the bill.
“All par ties – including the Scottish Tories–have a duty now to protect and defend the powers democratic ally endorsed by the people of Scotland. Far from returning powers to Scotland, as promised by the likes of Michael Gove, it is now crystal clear that Brexit means taking back control from Holy rood and taking control away from the Scottish people. That is a betrayal not just of devolution, but of the promises made in the Brexit referendum, including those in Scotland who voted Leave.
“It is also now clearer than ever that the only way to defend the powers of the Scottish Parliament is with inde - pendence. And when an independence referendum comes – as it will – it will no longer be a choice between independence and the st at usquo, but between independence and a Tory regime which is intent on crippling Holyrood.”
But Mr Jack insists that the legislation will preserve the integrity of seamless trade across the UK when it comes into effect. “The bill will also create a safety net giving businesses the certainty they need after Eu-wide rules cease to apply ,” he writes .“We will guarantee that, where Common Frameworks do not exist, regulations from one part of the UK will be recognised across the whole country.
“That means Scotland’ s distillers would be assured of access to barley grown in other parts of the UK and oatcakes baked in West Lothian will continue to appear on supermarket shelves in the West Midlands.”
Mr Johnson pledged to press on with the bill as he faced criticism from SNP Westminster leader Ian Black ford in the Commons yesterday.
“I believe that his attacks on it are totally illogical, it actually represents a very substantial transfer of powers, of sovereignty to Scotland, to Wales... it is a massive devolutionar y act,” Mr Johnson said.
“It also ensures the integrity of the UK internal market and he speaks of a transfer of powers to the UK government, on the contrary what he would do is transfer powers not just over competition and state aids back to Brussels, but of course over fisheries too and that is the policy of the SNP and it would be a disaster for our country.”
The Prime Minister has faced a backlash from within Tor y ranks after Northern Ireland Secretary Brandon Lewis said on Tuesday that legislation to change the Withdrawal Agreement would go against international law in a “very specific and limited way”.
Ministers have argued the measures are necessary to ensure “damaging” tariffs are not imposed by “default” on goods travelling from the rest of the UK to Northern Ireland if negotiations with the EU on a free trade agreement fail.
But senior Conservatives have expressed dismay, warning the move risks undermining Britain’s standing and reputation as an upholder of international law.
Tobias Ellwood, chairman of the Commons defence committee, said if the government went through with the changes to the agreement – which secured the UK’S departure from the EU in January–it would “lose the moral high ground”.
“This is about the rule of law and our resolve and commitment to up hold it ,” he told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme. To unilaterally ignore any treat y in its obligations which we’ve signed and submitted to the United Nations would actually go against everything we believe in.”
The decision by Boris Johnson to illegally prorogue parliament in order to prevent MPS from interfering with the UK government’s Brexit plans was an alarming sign that he is a Prime Minister who does not care much for democracy and the rule of law.
But at least he attempted to argue – until corrected by Scotland’s Court of Session and then the UK Supreme Court – that what he was doing was legal. In a sympathetic interpretation of events, he made a mistake, rather than actively choosing to become an “outlaw premier”.
However, the admission by a Government minister on Tuesday that the UK Internal Markets Bill would breach international law was an utterly shocking one, even if delivered so casually, and its publication yesterday confirmed that this really is what Johnson and co are threatening to do.
Bob Neil, the Conservative chair of the justice select committee, pointed out that any potential breach of the UK’S international legal obligations was “unacceptable”, adding that “adherence to the rule of law is not negotiable”.
Former prime minister Theresa May questioned how the government would “reassure future international partners that the UK can be trusted to abide by the legal obligations of the agreements it signs?” And the Conservative chair of the defence select committee, Tobias Ellwood, warned it would “severely weaken” the UK’S ability to hold countries like China, Russia and Iran to account when they fail to live up to international agreements.
The bill was also being described as akin to pressing the nuclear button in the talks with the EU, which has asked for an emergency meeting with the UK to discuss its implications. It increases the very real danger of a no-deal Brexit, which would deal a hammer blow to businesses across the country who are already struggling to cope with the coronavirus outbreak.
If all that was not enough, there are very real fears it will damage the Northern Ireland peace process – far from protecting it as Johnson claims – and, rightly or wrongly, the SNP described its provisions as “nothing short of an attack on Scotland’s parliament” because of implications for devolution. Given Brexit was already a major factor in the rising support for independence, the SNP will be delighted that Johnson has presented them with more arguments to deploy on the doorstep. Unionists may wish to remind Johnson that one of the UK’S most attractive qualities is that it is a place where the rule of law is respected.
“Brexit Britain” will be a very different place if it abandons such principles.