Tories can’t afford to stop being the Brexit party

The Government must find a different compromise on retained EU law to show it still has strong convictions

As many feared, the Government seems to be heading for difficulties on its Bill to reform or repeal the EU laws left on our statute book. Anyone who saw Kemi Badenoch’s uncertain performance in the Commons yesterday morning will have been left wondering whether she had really got her plans to water down the Bill right. Luckily there is still time for a rethink. As I was the minister who originally announced this whole process in 2021, I hope that happens, because I really want to see it succeed.

Many have tried to distort the provisions of this Retained EU Law Bill, so they bear repeating. Take a step back. When we left the EU in 2020, to ensure continuity, we took into our own legal system all those EU laws passed while we were a member. Remember, most of these laws were originally passed without any meaningful direct discussion in our Parliament. Whether we supported them or not, we could not stop them once they were voted through in Brussels. Now, to change these laws, full-dress primary legislation is needed – a Bill in both Houses, taking several months at best. So we were going to be stuck with it for a long time.

The Retained EU Law Bill, in the form eventually brought forward by Jacob Rees-mogg as minister, proposed to review all this outstanding law, some 4,000 pieces of legislation. It gave ministers the power to reform each law by mid-2026, mostly through an accelerated parliamentary process, or just to keep it. If neither decision had been taken by the end of 2023, the relevant law would simply disappear.

Some claim that this was really a secret plan to remove major pieces of employment or environmental legislation by the back door. Personally I would like to see some such reform, but it was never going to happen this way. Quite apart from the need for a manifesto commitment and proper political debate, it’s just not possible to leave huge gaps in the statute book. It was always a red herring.

There is no hiding that this review was a major task. It was intended to be. The idea was to force the Civil Service to look at all these laws and take action by the end of this year. Without this pressure, it would be too easy for ministers and officials to say “we’ll do this when we get round to it”. And then nothing would happen.

This was a doable task if tackled promptly, energetically, and with proper resources. That doesn’t seem to have happened. It also needed genuine political commitment – unfortunately perhaps lacking from the start. Now the deadline is approaching, the Government doesn’t think that it can do the job in time, but can’t take the risk of letting any laws just disappear with nothing to replace them.

Given this, it’s hard to blame Kemi Badenoch – who, let’s not forget, has only had this job for three months – for looking for a way out. Her new plan is simply to abolish about 600 trivial laws and leave the rest to be sorted through and dealt with later. If, for whatever reason, officials don’t get round to it – well that’s too bad.

Not surprisingly, Remainers and those who want close alignment with the EU have welcomed this plan. That alone suggests it’s not ideal. Moreover, it follows the Windsor Framework deal, which took Northern Ireland partly out of the scope of this reform anyway, and involved further commitments not to change EU law without checking with Brussels first.

Not surprisingly, some are uncomfortably wondering whether a pattern is being established in which the Government shies away from tough decisions and controversial change.

We have to accept the realities of the situation, which are, sadly, that the original job is not going to get done. But it’s still possible to compromise while retaining some strength of purpose.

So, don’t ask people to take future reforms on trust. Instead, this year, complete the review and formally set out the Government’s assessment and intention on each inherited law – keep, reform desirable in due course, clear reform needed rapidly, and so on – even if there is no time this year to pass the necessary legislation. Colleagues and I will be proposing amendments along these lines, so as to keep officials’ noses to the grindstone and maintain momentum into next year.

Since the smooth passage of the Windsor Framework, maybe a belief has become established that the centre of gravity of the parliamentary party is on the centre-left, and that difficult Brexit reforms can be safely parked. Perhaps that’s right: we will soon find out.

Still, the truth is, like it or not, that the Conservative Party is now a Brexit party. If we don’t seem to have the conviction to defend and drive through the consequences of our central policy to the satisfaction of our supporters – in this area and in others, such as cutting legal migration – we are just a “steady as she goes” party. Steady as she goes got us 26 per cent of the vote last week. We are going to need to do better than that. Getting this Bill right will help.