The United Kingdom Internal Market Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on 09 September 2020 (the Bill), provoking much debate and attracting criticism from many. But what exactly is contained within the Bill?
The United Kingdom Internal Market Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on 09 September 2020 (the Bill), provoking much debate and attracting criticism from many. But what exactly is contained within the Bill? Here we summarise its key elements and explain why certain aspects are proving to be controversial.
The Bill aims to become the Internal Market Act (the Act), which will preserve the UK internal market by limiting the regulations determined by each devolved administration (in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (NI)), ensuring that businesses can continue to trade freely across the UK as they currently do. It contains provisions in connection with:
Much of the regulation in these areas currently comes from EU law, collectively binding all UK nations, and this will cease to apply once the transition period ends on 31 December 2020. Once this regulation currently exercised at an EU level falls away, the devolved governments will have the power to make their own laws to govern such issues. In this context, it is important to understand that the devolved nations have the power to legislate in all areas except those which are reserved matters of public policy (such as defence) i.e. reserved matters are powers which are retained by UK government and carved out of the devolved administrations’ legislative competence. As such, without specific intervention, this leaves the potential for policy differentiation across different parts of the UK, which some argue could hinder free trade across the UK nations.
However, the approach being taken is not endorsed by the Scottish and Welsh governments, which would prefer to manage such matters through “common frameworks”. Under these frameworks, the power to legislate in these areas would vest with the devolved administrations, but all 4 nations’ governments would agree common principles as to how they will work together.
Clauses 1 to 21 (inclusive) and Schedules 1 and 2 of the Bill deal with market access for goods and services, enshrining the concepts of mutual recognition and non-discrimination. In brief, if goods can be sold legally in one part of the UK then they can be sold legally in any part of the UK, and if one part of the UK passes legislation that discriminates against goods from another part, that legislation will have no effect. Similarly, with services, this will remove the need for providers to be authorised separately for each nation. However, some services are excluded (e.g. broadcasting and financial), and there are exceptions (e.g. practising lawyers in Scotland will still require the relevant Scots Law qualification).
Clauses 22-27 aim to ensure that a professional qualification obtained in one part of the UK is automatically recognised in other parts of the UK, allowing individuals to work more freely between the different nations without the need to requalify, subject to some exceptions.
Clause 28-39 relate to the creation of an Office for the Internal Market (OIM) and certain information gathering powers it will possess. The OIM will be within the CMA and will be tasked with the monitoring of the internal market, reporting on its functioning and efficacy. However, its powers will be limited - even if it identifies that a particular devolved administration has passed regulations which have a detrimental impact on the internal market, there will be no obligation on that government to act on the OIM’s findings.
Clauses 40 and 41 aim to ensure that NI’s businesses will enjoy “unfettered access” to the UK internal market. When implementing the Protocol, all UK authorities are to have the “highest possible regard” to NI’s place in the internal market. The creation of new checks, controls or administrative processes on the movement of goods between NI and GB will be prevented.
Clauses 42 provides a power to disapply or modify the requirement for export declarations for goods moving from NI to GB. This is a requirement under EU customs rules, which apply to NI under the Protocol, and something which the UK government is currently seeking exemption from. Nonetheless, if an exemption is not agreed, then under this provision the requirement can be removed unilaterally by the UK government.
Clauses 43 and 44 relate to EU state aid rules and NI. Under the Protocol (Article 10 and Annex 5), EU state aid law will apply in relation to trade in goods and electricity between NI and the EU. However, the provisions of the Protocol have the potential to apply UK wide, something which the UK government wishes to avoid. Therefore, clause 43 permits the UK government to create regulations to determine how the Article 10 is to be applied, which may include its interpretation, disapplication or modification.
Clause 45(1) reinforces the efficacy of clauses 42 and 43. Notwithstanding any incompatibility with relevant domestic or international law, these sections, and any regulations made under them, will have legal effect. Essentially, provisions 42 and 43 will have legal effect regardless of them being at odds with the EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement (WA) and the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020. Moreover, clause 45(2) of the Bill stipulates that regulations made under 42 and 43 “are not to be regarded as unlawful on the grounds of any incompatibility or inconsistency with relevant international or domestic law”.
Clauses 46 and 47 afford the UK government the power to make payments for the purposes of promoting economic development, providing infrastructure in the UK, supporting cultural and sporting activities, projects and events, and supporting international and domestic education and training activities and exchanges.
Clause 48 deals with state aid and clarifies that subsidy control or state aid powers are reserved matters and can only be administered by the UK government. This is a specific area where both the Scottish and Welsh governments have expressed their concern, with some arguing that state aid is a devolved matter.
Clause 49 provides that the Act will be a protected enactment. Therefore, the devolved governments will not be able to undermine the Act through the passing of their own legislation. Furthermore, the UK government would be required to pass new, primary legislation if it wishes to override its provisions.
Clauses 50-54 include general provisions, tackling disapplication of certain elements once they are no longer required, the creation of regulations under the Act, and interpretation.
In addition to more general issues raised by the devolved administrations, clauses 42-45 (those relating to the Protocol and its application) have proven to be particularly controversial aspects of the Bill, sparking much debate and cross-party criticism. It is these provisions which have instigated some to suggest that the Bill will break international law, including NI Secretary Brandon Lewis, albeit in a “very specific and limited way”. Concerns have also been raised over the issue of trust and how such a move has the potential to damage the UK’s reputation in a global trade deal context.
Nonetheless, the WA is an international treaty and the EU will expect the UK to implement it in its entirety. The publication of the Bill prompted the EU to request an extraordinary meeting of the Joint Committee which oversees the implementation of the WA, and it has been reported that the EU have given the UK government until the end of September to drop their plans or risk jeopardising trade talks. Furthermore, the potential exists for the judiciary to rule on the legality of such provisions. It could be that the Supreme Court is asked to determine whether such an approach can actually be adopted by the UK government.
The Bill is currently only at its early stages of debate. It is yet to pass through the House of Commons and will then need to pass through the House of Lords. Given the level of cross-party criticism it has already attracted, it is hard to see that this path will be either smooth or expeditious. And there is much scope for it to undergo amendments prior to its enactment, something which may prove necessary if it is indeed to be approved by both Houses and move to receiving Royal Assent.
We will be watching its progress closely.
Law firm Browne Jacobson has collaborated with Wiltshire Council and Christ Church Business School on the launch event of The Council Company Best Practice and Innovation Network, a platform which brings together academic experts and senior local authority leaders, allowing them to share best practice in relation to council companies.
In the Autumn Statement delivered on 17 November, rises to the National Living Wage and National Minimum Wage rates were announced, to take effect from 1 April 2023.
Announced in September but scrapped on 17 November the investment zone proposals were very short lived. The proposal has now morphed into the proposal for a smaller number of clustered zones earmarked for investment.
Settlement agreements are commonplace in an employment context and are ordinarily used to provide the parties to the agreement with certainty following the conclusion of an employment relationship.
On 2 November 2022, the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in the much awaiting case of Hillside Parks Ltd v Snowdonia National Park Authority [2022] UKSC 30. The Court’s judgment suggests that the long established practice of using drop-in applications is in fact much more restricted than previously thought. This judgment therefore has significant implications for both the developers and local planning authorities.
Across the UK, homelessness is an urgent crisis, and one that is set to grow amid the rising cost of living. Local authorities are at the forefront of responding to this crisis, but with a lack of properties that are suitable for social housing across the UK, vulnerable individuals and families are often housed in temporary accommodation.
Law firm Browne Jacobson has appointed former Vice President and Chief Planning Officer (CPO) of Aston Martin Lagonda, Nikki Rimmington as its first Non-Executive Director (NED) of its Manufacturing & Industrials sector strategy board.
Updates include UK Shared Prosperity Fund, contracts, Subsidy Control Bill, data controller liability, Government Covid-19 procurement and Highway Code revisions.
The complex and rather nebulous transitional subsidy control regime set out in the UK-EU Trade and Co-operation Agreement and the UK’s wider international commitments has made it difficult for public authorities and those working with them to proceed with certainty where subsidies are involved.
Investment zones have been introduced by the Conservative party to get the United Kingdom (UK) ‘working, building and growing’. They are to be designated sites which provide time-limited tax incentives, streamlined planning rules and wider support for local growth to encourage investment and accelerate the development of housing and infrastructure that the UK needs to drive economic growth. Processes and requirements that slow down development will be stripped back with the intention of attracting new investment.
Created at the end of the Brexit transition period, Retained EU Law is a category of domestic law that consists of EU-derived legislation retained in our domestic legal framework by the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. This was never intended to be a permanent arrangement as parliament promised to deal with retained EU law through the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill (the “Bill”).
It is clear that the digital landscape, often termed cyberspace, is a man-made environment, in which human behaviour dominates and where technology both influences and aids our role in it — through the internet, telecoms and networked computer systems, which are often interdependent. The extent to which any organisation is potentially vulnerable to cyber-attack depends on how well these elements are aligned.
