header-logo header-logo

26 April 2017
Issue: 7743 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit , EU
printer mail-detail

The opposition speaks on Brexit

Pre-General Election, Keir Starmer sets out Labour’s plans for the UK’s exit from the EU

The Labour Party would guarantee EU citizens’ right to stay in the UK following Brexit but has ruled out both membership of the single market and a second referendum.

Outlining plans for Brexit this week, Keir Starmer, shadow Brexit secretary, said Labour would ensure that the European Court of Justice continues to play a role in the UK legal system and that Labour would continue to implement EU labour laws and environmental standards post-Brexit. However, he also said Labour would not accept the current rules on free movement of people, which means it could not be a member of the single market unless the single market is reformed.

Starmer said Labour would replace the proposed Great Repeal Bill with an EU Rights and Protections Bill to ‘make sure that all EU-derived laws—including workplace laws, consumer rights and environmental protections—are fully protected without qualifications, limitations or sunset clauses’. He continued: ‘A Labour government will work with EU partners, trade unions and businesses to ensure that, outside the EU, the UK does not lag behind Europe in workplace protections or environmental standards in future.’ He also pledged to replace the government’s Brexit White Paper with a new one confirming that jobs and the economy are the government’s priority throughout.

Prime Minister Theresa May has said her government will prioritise regaining control of immigration.

Starmer said powers being returned to the UK that relate to devolved matters, notably agriculture, would be given to the devolved administrations. He said Labour would consider keeping Britain in the customs union. Labour also want to maintain membership with bodies such as Eurojust, Europol and the European Medicines Agency, he said.

Theresa May described Labour’s Brexit plans as ‘nonsensical’. Speaking ahead of Starmer’s speech, Liberal Democrat Leader Tim Farron said Labour’s Brexit policy had ‘more holes than a colander’.

Meanwhile, commentators say the 8 June General Election will benefit the Brexit process.

Oliver Ilott, senior researcher at the think tank Institute for government, said the election would clarify the prime minister’s mandate, clearly demarking what they can and cannot agree, thus limiting their ability to make concessions and strengthening their bargaining power. Ilott said pushing the next election back to 2022 rather than 2020 would give the government the flexibility for a three-year transition period.

Issue: 7743 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit , EU
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll