The Withdrawal Bill: Destination and Journey

The report argues that the draft European Union (Withdrawal) Bill jeopardises the UK's environment and legal system by transferring excessive power to Government Ministers and failing to guarantee the retention of all EU environmental laws and governance functions. It identifies three primary risks: a democratic deficit caused by broad ministerial powers and inadequate scrutiny; a reduction in environmental protection due to the loss of overarching principles and incomplete transposition of Directives; and a governance gap resulting from the absence of independent replacements for EU institutions. The authors recommend that retained EU law only be modified by Acts of Parliament, that environmental principles be explicitly retained, and that new, independent governance mechanisms be established through primary legislation.

• The Withdrawal Bill risks creating a 'democratic deficit' by transferring significant power from Parliament to Government Ministers and the civil service, while restricting public participation in environmental decision-making.
• The report asserts that the Bill fails to ensure the retention of the full body of EU environmental law, specifically omitting overarching environmental principles and failing to fully convert EU Directives, which may lead to the loss of crucial reporting and reviewing obligations.
• There is a significant risk of a 'governance gap' because the Bill does not provide a robust pathway to replace the oversight, compliance, and enforcement functions currently performed by EU institutions like the European Commission and the CJEU.
• The Bill grants Government Ministers broad and vague powers to 'correct' deficiencies in retained EU law via secondary legislation, which the report argues could be used to lower environmental standards without sufficient Parliamentary oversight.
• The report highlights that the UK has a history of incomplete or incorrect transposition of EU Directives, and warns that without a mandatory remedy before exit, environmental standards will drop.
• The draft Bill's approach to devolved competences is viewed as a 'power grab' by the Scottish and Welsh Governments, as it restricts their ability to modify retained EU law.
• Existing Parliamentary scrutiny procedures for secondary legislation (negative and affirmative procedures) are deemed inadequate for the constitutional scale of the Withdrawal Bill.

APA

West, T., & Hill, K. (2017). The Withdrawal Bill: Destination and Journey. ClientEarth. https://www.clientearth.org/media/stdd4vum/withdrawal-bill-report-ce-en.pdf

Chicago

West, Tom, and Karla Hill. The Withdrawal Bill: Destination and Journey. ClientEarth, 2017. https://www.clientearth.org/media/stdd4vum/withdrawal-bill-report-ce-en.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=West |first1=Tom |last2=Hill |first2=Karla |title=The Withdrawal Bill: Destination and Journey |publisher=ClientEarth |date=September 2017 |url=https://www.clientearth.org/media/stdd4vum/withdrawal-bill-report-ce-en.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{west2017withdrawal, author = {West, Tom and Hill, Karla}, title = {{The Withdrawal Bill: Destination and Journey}}, institution = {ClientEarth}, year = {2017}, month = sep, url = {https://www.clientearth.org/media/stdd4vum/withdrawal-bill-report-ce-en.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }