This briefing document by Martin Howe QC is being circulated by Brexiteer MPs. It says that the government’s white paper commits to binding ECJ jurisdiction in Britain and concludes:
The repeated claims made by the government and the Prime Minister over the last few days that the Chequers proposals would result in “Restoring the supremacy of British courts by ending the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in the UK” (point 9 in letter from TM to DD in response to his resignation letter) are therefore not true. The supremacy of British courts is certainly not restored. The jurisdiction of the ECJ “in” the UK is only ended in the sense that the route by which the ECJ will continue to exercise its supremacy over British courts is via the international joint reference procedure rather than by direct references from British courts.
Here is Jacob Rees-Mogg’s response to the white paper:
“This is the greatest vassalage since King John paid homage to Phillip II at Le Goulet in 1200. This White paper has not needed age to turn yellow. There are very few signs of the Prime Minister’s famous red lines. It is a pale imitation of the paper prepared by David Davis, a bad deal for Britain. It is not be something I would vote for nor is it what the British people voted for. In particular this paper sets out that the UK will be subject to EU laws while having no say in their creation. The Common Rule Book will not be Common it will be EU law, interpreted by the EU Court with the UK subjected to EU fines for non-compliance. The UK has accepted it cannot diverge from ‘ongoing harmonisation’ without activating repercussions for Northern Ireland. In effect Parliament will have no say over future EU laws implemented in the UK. The UK has accepted that it will collect and hand over EU taxes. This is an unwarranted intrusion into the control of our border. The absence of reciprocity is concerning and the cost to the taxpayer unknown. Taken as a whole this recreates many of the worst aspects of the EU the British people voted to leave. This does not respect the referendum result.”
Comments are closed