I will come on to the Equality Act within a page.
Amendments 52, 266, 267, 268, 370, 371 and 372 have been tabled by the right hon. Members for Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford (Yvette Cooper), for Ross, Skye and Lochaber (Ian Blackford) and for Carshalton and Wallington (Tom Brake). They would prevent any changes to the Equality Act. As part of the Government’s clear commitment to maintaining equalities protections throughout the process of EU exit, we have tabled amendment 391, which will ensure that the amendments that will be made to equalities legislation under this and certain other powers in the Bill are transparent, and provide confirmation that the Minister has had due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct prohibited under the Equality Act.
Indeed, hon. Members may not be aware that the Government have already published a document on our website setting out the changes that we intend to make to the Equality Act, making it clear that they are limited to technical adjustments that are designed to ensure that the protections established in the Act continue to operate after exit.
Let me just run through them for the right hon. Gentleman. They include: references to the European Parliament; references to future EU obligations, including new EU obligations implemented under the European Communities Act 1972; references to EU law as a generic term and harmonisation measures; references to specific EU directives which are set out in the paper; and, finally, references to the UK as part of the European economic area. So I commend that paper to right hon. and hon. Members who are interested and/or concerned about it. With that in mind, as changes are necessary, as set out in the paper, I urge right hon. and hon. Members not to press their amendments.
5.45 pm
Amendment 222, which seeks to conserve consumers’ rights and protections, also fails to supply a definition of what those might be or how this might be measured. It would open up the corrections, which will ensure crucial protections continue to operate, to an increased risk of litigation. However, let me reassure hon. Members that clause 7(1) is clear: Ministers may only do what is
“appropriate to prevent, remedy or mitigate—
(a) any failure of retained EU law to operate effectively, or
(b) any other deficiency in retained EU law,
arising from the withdrawal”.
As I have said before, if an issue does not arise from our withdrawal from the EU, Ministers may not amend the law using the powers in clause 7.
I come to amendments 12 and 13, tabled by my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Beaconsfield. Although the Government are sympathetic to his desire to ensure that certain conditions are met before clause 8 and 9 powers are used, we cannot support the amendments. The structure of the conditions set out by him introduce a number of tests into the Bill that we believe are not, at this point, adequately defined and are too subjective. They could therefore risk frustrating the Government’s ability to ensure our international obligations are complied with, create uncertainty about the law and provoke a significant body of litigation.
On amendment 13, the Government do not believe that a series of statutory restrictions placed on the power in clause 9 are necessary. Exercise of the clause 9 power will be subject to the usual public law principles designed to ensure that the Executive act reasonably, in good faith and for proper purposes.
Amending the power so that regulations made under it could not, for example, make provisions of constitutional significance or remove any necessary protection, would be vague and opaque. It would also generate considerable uncertainty and, potentially, unnecessary litigation, given the lack of definition and clarity as to what these terms mean in practice. Again, clause 9 needs to be both clear and flexible to enable us to implement the withdrawal agreement or those elements of it needed prior to exit day which it would not be possible to include in the withdrawal agreement and implementation
Bill by virtue of the time available. I therefore urge my right hon. and learned Friend not to press his amendments to a vote.