Sunak versus the Tory Brexit ultras

Rishi Sunak is heading for trouble over the Retained EU Law bill, a piece of legislation that paves the way for all EU law to be removed from the UK’s statute books by 2023. The europhobes love it. Yet, it now seems inevitable that Sunak will be forced by the House of Lords to abandon plans for this bonfire of EU law. It’s a delay that Brexiters – particularly the Conservative Peer Lord Cruddas – equate with “reversing Brexit”.

The aim was to remove roughly 4,000 pieces of legislation by the end of 2023. Each rule would be subject to 25 detailed questions about its use, along with multiple sub-questions. The scale of the proposed task is mammoth. It has meant thousands of officials will be diverted to review legislation full time. The December 2023 deadline is now being seen as impossible by Whitehall.

This is a big problem for Sunak. During his leadership campaign, he said he would “review or repeal” EU laws within the first 100 days of his premiership. But senior figures in his own government, including the business secretary Grant Shapps, are keen to slow the whole thing down.

The overhaul has also united both businesses and unions in opposition. A dozen organisations, including the Trades Union Congress, the Institute of Directors (IoD) and the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development have written to Shapps, claiming the plan would only create further uncertainty for businesses.

Shapps’ predecessor, Jacob Rees-Mogg, however, is urging the government to continue at full speed ahead. Rees-Mogg is keen to deliver the benefits of Brexit (just as soon as he’s located them) and sees the legal bonfire as a way to do it.

He may not get his wish, however. So far, three departments are expected to extend the deadline: the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS); the Department for Transport; and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. All three want an extension to 2026.
At a speech to launch his new maths programme, Sunak was asked by the Financial Times’ George Parker if he would confirm whether or not this legal overhaul was going to happen. In reply, he spoke about the need to build an economy based on innovation and to ensure we have regulations that support this. It was time to use the opportunities from Britain’s newly found freedoms that would “create jobs”, not uncertainty. The Brexiters in his own party, both in the Commons and the Lords, would not have enjoyed hearing that evasive reply.