UK Parliamentary Scrutiny of the EU Political and Legal Space after Brexit^*

Abstract

This article considers the effect of Brexit upon the UK Parliament and whether Brexit will reverse the 'de-parliamentarisation' that has been identified through EU membership. Supporters of Brexit identified an end to ever closer integration, or Europeanisation, and restoration of parliamentary control over repatriated competences as a key benefit of Brexit. Firstly, this article explores how Parliament may adapt to leaving the institutional structures of Europeanisation and whether this may lead to 'de-Europeanisation' of UK law, policy and practice, including how UK courts may respond to 'de-Europeanisation' in their application of Retained EU law. Secondly, the article examines the extent to which Brexit might produce a 'reparliamentarisation' as Parliament exercises repatriated competences. We argue that this depends on the future UK-EU agreement and the extent to which it utilises EU legislative norms and principles. Finally, we review how different future relationship scenarios may impact upon Parliament's engagement with EU affairs.

The Difficulty in Engaging the Engaged: Administrative Adaptation to the Early Warning System within the UK Houses of Parliament

“…Indeed, Brexit radically reshaped the context of these discussions and the Houses of Parliament are now outside the 'European parliamentary space' created by the Treaties (Cygan et al 2020(Cygan et al : 1610. However, the closer examination of the UK EWS experience still provides valuable insights for both UK and EU stakeholders.…”

“…On one hand, adaptation to the EWS constitutes one of the largest changes to the UK's EU scrutiny systems before the Brexit vote. As the HoP and the UK's devolved legislatures embarks on further changes to these structures after the country's withdrawal, the post-EWS HoP scrutiny frameworks serve as the basis for future development (Cygan et al 2020). In addition, although studies considered the effect of the EWS on UK subnational legislatures (Högenauer 2019(Högenauer , 2017; Borońska-Hryniewiecka 2017), they do not discuss associated administrative adaptation in depth or expand on the implications of these developments regarding the post-Brexit era.…”

“…The UK Houses of Parliament (HoP) were one of the main advocates for introducing such a mechanism prior to the Treaty of Lisbon (Wintour 2003;Granat 2018). After 2009, the HoP also became relatively prolific users of the reasoned opinions procedure (Malang et al 2017: Table I; Cygan et al 2020Cygan et al : 1609 and contributed to debates about further developing the EWS (House of Lords 2013a; Cooper 2016). Although the United Kingdom (UK) left formal EU interparliamentary cooperation frameworks due to Brexit, the UK HoP experience with adapting to the EWS holds relevant insights for the post-Brexit HoP as well as EU NPs.…”

“…Undertaking this examination can produce novel insights regarding the HoP's approaches to EU scrutiny in the immediate run-up to the 2016 referendum. Furthermore, adaptation to the EWS was the last major change to HoP EU scrutiny frameworks before the 2016 referendum (Cygan et al 2020). Therefore, the process of the adaptation to the EWS can produce clues regarding the future trajectory of post-Brexit HoP engagement with scrutinising EU legislation.…”

Multilevel dynamics of the UK’s EU exit: identity, territory, policy and power

“…The former focused on political science, economics and law, the latter also drawing in more anthropology, sociology, socio-legal studies and geography. Taken together, UKICE and Governance after Brexit cover a significantly broad range across the UK social sciences (in addition to this special issue, see, for example, the research reported in a Journal of Common Market Studies symposium on 'Impacts of Brexit on Civil Society, Parliament and Access to Justice'; Barnard & Fraser Butlin, 2020;Cygan et al, 2020;Minto, 2020;Wincott, 2020a).…”