The Brexit Decision: Holyrood may still have a role to play

The Supreme Court's decision to exclude Holyrood from the decision to trigger Brexit only confirmed what we already knew, says Stephen Tierney - that conventions are not laws. However, the proposed Great Repeal Bill is an entirely different matter. 
 
So Holyrood’s consent is not needed to trigger Brexit? Maybe not for now, but in the longer run MSPs will argue that the consent of the Scottish Parliament remains a constitutional requirement before the final decision is made to leave the EU. In fact, while the Supreme Court was clear about Westminster’s powers, it largely ducked the Sewel convention issue. 
 
What do we know for certain? As a matter of law Mrs May cannot trigger Article 50 of the EU Treaty without the consent of the UK Parliament. That means an Act will have to be passed. This is a headache for the Government but not a migraine. David Davis will need to bring forward a Bill but it is now clear that an oven-ready version is already sitting on his desk. MPs will demand a full debate and may even put forward amendments, as might the House of Lords, but the Bill will almost certainly get through Parliament without any cast-iron commitments being made by the Government to detailed scrutiny of the Brexit process. MPs will get another vote at the end of negotiations with the EU, but this has already been promised by the Prime Minister and is likely to be more a ‘veto Brexit if you dare’ threat to MPs than a deferential ‘please may we leave’ proposition.
 
So no role for Holyrood? This is not so clear. The Supreme Court has said that an Act of Parliament to trigger Brexit will not require, as a matter of law, the agreement of the devolved legislatures. But we knew that anyway. The Sewel convention, by which consent of the Scottish Parliament is needed when Westminster legislates in devolved areas, is exactly that – a convention, not a legal rule. And conventions are about what happens: whether politicians abide by generally accepted constitutional rules even when these are not enforceable in the courts. Westminster will not now accept that a Bill which simply triggers Brexit activates the convention, but there is going to be a much bigger argument over the Great Repeal Bill which will remove the law that took the UK into Europe in the first place. In a potentially important aside, the Supreme Court did acknowledge the convention and affirmed its constitutional significance. The real test for Sewel will come when the repeal bill is on the table. At that point we will see just what role the Scottish Parliament has when the really fundamental constitutional decisions are being made.
 

Comments policy

All comments posted on the site via Disqus are automatically published. Additionally comments are sent to moderators for checking and removal if necessary. We encourage open debate and real time commenting on the website. The Centre on Constitutional Change cannot be held responsible for any content posted by users. Any complaints about comments on the site should be sent to info@centreonconstitutionalchange.ac.uk

Stephen Tierney's picture
post by Stephen Tierney
University of Edinburgh
25th January 2017

Latest blogs

  • 10th August 2018

    Brexit is re-making the UK’s constitution under our noses. The territorial constitution is particularly fragile. Pursuing Brexit, Theresa May’s government has stumbled into deep questions about devolution.

  • 8th August 2018

    The UK in a Changing Europe has formed a new Brexit Policy Panel (BPP). The BPP is a cross-disciplinary group of over 100 leading social scientists created to provide ongoing analysis of where we have got to in the Brexit process, and to forecast where we are headed. Members of the UK in a Changing Europe Brexit Policy Panel complete a monthly survey addressing three key areas of uncertainty around Brexit: if —and when—the UK will leave the EU; how Brexit will affect British politics; and what our relationship with the EU is likely to look like in the future. The CCC participates on the Panel.

  • 2nd August 2018

    The House of Commons Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee issued its report ‘Devolution and Exiting the EU: reconciling differences and building strong relationships’. Discussing its contents, Professor Nicola McEwen suggests that the report includes some practical recommendations, some of which were informed by CCC research. It also shines a light on some of the more difficult challenges ahead.

  • 31st July 2018

    The politicisation of Brexit, combined with deteriorating relations between London and Dublin, has created a toxic atmosphere in Northern Ireland, says Mary Murphy, which will require imagination and possibly new institutions to resolve.

  • 25th July 2018

    Given that there are many policy differences between Northern Ireland and other parts of the UK, asks Jonathan Evershed, why has customs policy been singled out as a red line by Unionists?

Read More Posts