THE First Ministers of Scotland and Wales have written to peers setting their own proposed changes to crucial Brexit legislation.
The Scottish and Welsh governments have been locked in a dispute with the UK Government over the return of devolved powers from Brussels once Britain leaves the EU.
READ: Nicola Sturgeon and Carwyn Jones's full message to Lords
While UK ministers have brought forward amendments to the EU (Withdrawal) Bill aimed at addressing the disagreement, Nicola Sturgeon and Carwyn Jones said they did not have their support.
The leaders have written to the House of Lords ahead of its consideration of aspects of the Bill related to devolution on Monday.
UK ministers want to retain temporary control in areas such as agriculture, fisheries, food labelling and public procurement after Brexit.
READ MORE: ‘Ulster is a powder keg which Brexit may ignite’
They say a “temporary restriction” on the devolved governments using some of the powers returning from the EU is “to help ensure an orderly departure from EU law” and allow common frameworks to be established.
In their letter, the First Ministers said their governments agreed common frameworks are appropriate in some cases, however they said UK ministers’ amendments would see them only “merely consulted” on these.
They have called for further amendments to ensure that the temporary restriction on devolved powers would require their consent and any primary legislation required to establish common frameworks must be agreed by them.
They have also called for a “sunset clause” on the restrictions, limiting how long they would be in effect without further action.
While talks between the devolved administrations and the UK Government continue, the leaders stated that they “would be pleased to put forward detailed amendments if it proves impossible to reach agreement”.
“The two governments have also asked that the UK Government agree a level playing field and make a commitment not to bring forward legislation in respect of England in those areas where it is agreed common frameworks are to be established,” they added.
The letter to the Lords follows a meeting between the First Ministers and Theresa May earlier this week.
Speaking afterwards, Sturgeon said the “issues that remain between us are not insignificant but neither are they insurmountable”, while Jones said he was “hopeful” of an agreement.
Meanwhile, it was revealed the UK could decide not to impose border checks after Brexit if it fails to reach a customs agreement with the European Union, under plans reportedly being considered in Whitehall.
Amid concerns about tailbacks and hold-ups at major ports – and the thorny issue of the Northern Irish border – officials are reported to have discussed the option of not applying checks to enable trade to flow smoothly.
The Government said it had set out its aim for a deal with Brussels which would make trade “as frictionless as possible”, but added “we have a duty to plan for the alternative”.
Border operators are said to have been involved in talks with officials – covered by a non-disclosure agreement to maintain confidentiality – about the arrangements which could apply after Brexit. If there was no deal with the EU “this is what we call the ‘throw open the borders option’”, said one operator.
Under that scenario the UK would unilaterally decide not to enforce customs and other border checks – assuming that the EU would follow suit – temporarily maintaining frictionless trade.
Transport Secretary Chris Grayling has said separately there would be no checks on lorries arriving at Dover, and suggested that trade would flow seamlessly after Brexit.
“We will maintain a free-flowing border at Dover, we will not impose checks in the port,” he said on BBC’s Question Time.
Labour MP Chuka Umunna said: “If it becomes a ‘third country’ outside the EU’s Customs Union, the UK will almost certainly be under legal obligations to mount customs checks at its border.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel