European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (Consequential Modifications and Repeals and Revocations) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Department for Exiting the European Union

European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (Consequential Modifications and Repeals and Revocations) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019

Baroness McIntosh of Pickering Excerpts
Thursday 21st March 2019

(5 years, 1 month ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Callanan Portrait Lord Callanan
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Unsurprisingly, the Minister does think that we should proceed with this particular statutory instrument and I am sorry that the noble Lord was not able to come along to the committee where we discussed it. If it is helpful to him, I shall set out what it actually does. Perhaps many people do believe that Article 50 should be revoked. That is not the policy of my party and as far as I know it is not the policy of his party. Were that eventuality to come to pass, although I do not think that it will, of course none of these amendments will take effect because we would not then have a leaving date. They come into effect only when we leave.

For the noble Lord’s information, let me summarise briefly what the statutory instrument does. It sets out what happens to non-ambulatory cross-references after exit day and how references made to EU legislation after exit day are to be read. The SI also amends domestic interpretation legislation to ensure that it is adequately referenced and incorporates retained EU law; that is, the new body of domestic law created by the European Union (Withdrawal) Act. Finally, this SI repeals and revokes various pieces of EU-derived domestic legislation that will become redundant on exit day. The noble Lord will notice the references to “exit day” in the regulations.

Baroness McIntosh of Pickering Portrait Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I am most grateful to my noble friend for writing to me on the concern I expressed, which was addressed in the House of Commons when MPs considered the statutory instrument, on the fact that non-ambulatory provisions had been omitted from the original European Union (Withdrawal) Act. However, his response actually missed the point that I raised with him in my letter that was expressed by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, my honourable friend Christopher Heaton-Harris, in the other place. It is a very simple question: if this was omitted from the original Act, are there any other omissions of which he and his department are aware that may have to come back to the House in the short time available before 29 March?