There are very legitimate concerns that Remainers are already preparing the ground to ambush the Retained EU Law Bill which allows for EU law to be modified or replaced. This and the changes within the Financial Services and Markets Bill, affecting the city, are vital to restore the UK’s independence, prosperity, and sovereignty.
Barnabas Reynolds, author of Restoring UK Law, said, “EU laws and method are prescriptive and controlling, and evidence shows, constitutes a drag on growth. Our legal system is clear, operationally apolitical, and much admired worldwide – giving rise to greater legal certainty than that achieved through EU law. Legal certainty is the lifeblood of our much-prized individual and commercial freedoms.”
The task of revision is said to be subtle and complex, involving considerable intellectual effort. It should be a priority for government to take independent advice on what laws to keep, and how they should be redrafted to match our ‘common law’. However, Whitehall departments, regulators and other bodies involved in managing the system whilst the UK was inside the EU, will be reluctant, unwilling, or unable to change direction and identify what needs to change.
Restoring our legal approach is the constitutional consequence of leaving the EU. Remainers will stall if possible, making only minor changes so that any steps taken are reversible, leaving the door open for a future government to readopt EU law.
Sovereignty over our laws, and the ability to fashion them for our own approach and interests, is at the heart of Brexit. As Mr. Reynolds makes clear, a failure to appreciate this allowed Theresa May to negotiate away sovereignty over our laws in return for trade. One result is the mess of the Northern Ireland Protocol.
Law and our legal method must be placed back at the heart of our system. It will require extensive work by “imaginative lawyers supported by skilled common law drafting, which must start right away, in order to be effective.”
It took 15 rounds of voting before Kevin McCarthy was elected speaker of the House of Representative in the US Senate, but at what cost? President Putin must be ecstatic as one of the many concessions McCarthy made was to agree to limit any future aid to Ukraine. Former President Trump will no doubt have influenced this outcome.
Most of us believe in ‘free speech’ but should not a line be drawn when airing one’s ‘supposed’ dirty linen in public, and purposely putting former trusted friends, colleagues, and one’s immediate family in danger of being targeted by some of the most ruthless and uncivilized savages on God’s earth?