Holyrood, made browsable

Hansard

Every contribution to the Official Report — chamber and committee — searchable in one place. Pulled from data.parliament.scot, indexed for full-text search, linked through to every MSP.

129
Current MSPs
415
MSPs ever elected
14
Parties on record
2,095,827
Hansard contributions
1999–2026
Coverage span
Official Report

Search Hansard contributions

Clear
Showing 0 of 2,095,827 contributions in session S6, 11 May 2026 – 10 Jun 2026. Latest 30 days: 2,655. Coverage: 12 May 1999 — 09 Jun 2026.

No contributions match those filters.

← Back to list
Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 29 November 2022

29 Nov 2022 · S6 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill
Fairlie, Jim SNP Perthshire South and Kinross-shire Watch on SPTV

The editorial director of Le Monde, Sylvie Kauffman, said, a couple of years ago,

“Watching the long descent of Westminster into something resembling hell has been an exhausting experience.”

It is easy to appreciate those words, given the absolutely chaotic and disastrously mismanaged Brexit that has resulted in economic catastrophe for the UK, with grim longer-term forecasts until the Tories and the new pro-Brexit Labour party find the bravery to admit the folly and change direction.

The real problem here, of course, is that, unlike our European neighbours, we are not bystanders with the ability to step back and watch the unfolding shambles; we are collateral damage in the Tory party internal struggles, and we are being denied a democratic route to stop it for the people of Scotland.

Had we voted yes in 2014, we would have been like every other European country, watching our nearest neighbour wreak havoc on itself. We might have been able to advise and cajole them into considering their actions, but we would not have been dragged down with them. That, unfortunately, is a consequence of trusting the unionist narrative, which we now know to be completely untrue.

However, we are where we are, so even more worrying is the fact that the responsibility to outline a restructuring of the laws inherited through the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020 was given to two of the most prominent fantasist Brexiteers, Lord Frost and Jacob Rees Mogg. That should be a red flag to anyone. The UK Government insists that the aim is to

“take back control of our statute book”

and to do so by a sunset date of the final day of 2023. All inherited EU laws will expire on that date unless they are expressly preserved in some form.

Unsurprisingly, not only the changes but the arbitrary rush have caused great panic among those who are working on the front line of the key sectors and industries that undoubtedly contribute positively to the Scottish economy and are at most threat from that folly, and of course safeguard essential, hard-fought-for rights. Workers’ rights, the environment, food standards, health and safety, aviation safety, data privacy, animal welfare, consumer rights and production standards will all be required to follow a new play book as the UK Government delivers its judgements on what exactly it means to “take back control” of those laws.

There was a very interesting evidence session in last week’s Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee where stakeholders presented views on what the bill will change. Food Standards Scotland’s deputy chief executive Julie Hesketh-Laird stated that the sunsetting approach is a “huge risk”. She said:

“The bill seems to confuse red tape and consumer protection ... the aim of the bill is to take us back to the days when British laws were dominant.”

She said that that was dangerous, as doing that

“would take us back to nothing”.

She pointed out that

“EU law ... was put in place through a proper process with risk assessments”

and stressed that sunsetting could mean that we lose all consumer protection.

Not only is it a major risk to consider fundamental changes to a wide range of laws at pace, it is clear that this is also an attempt by Westminster to interfere in Scotland’s current devolved responsibilities. We have of course witnessed the reaction to last week’s Supreme Court ruling, which shows that the UK establishment does not have any respect for Scotland’s democracy. The Scottish Government was elected with the largest-ever majority in favour of holding a referendum and, in the context of today’s debate, Scotland voted overwhelmingly to stay in the EU. However, we now have Alister Jack considering sticking his nose into the business of the Scottish civil service. The intention is clear, and it is not just the loss of EU laws that is at stake.

In the same item of business

The Presiding Officer (Alison Johnstone) NPA
The next item of business—
Martin Whitfield (South Scotland) (Lab) Lab
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I seek your guidance in respect of this afternoon’s Government debate, which, on the face of it, appears to cut acros...
The Presiding Officer NPA
I thank Mr Whitfield for his point of order. There have been instances when the Parliament has debated matters that are the subject of committee scrutiny pri...
The Cabinet Secretary for the Constitution, External Affairs and Culture (Angus Robertson) SNP
I would like to return to the Brexit freedoms bill, which was last discussed in the chamber on 22 June. At that time, I said that the bill would have “a dam...
Martin Whitfield Lab
Would the cabinet secretary agree that that cliff edge means that there is the potential that there are regulations that we do not even know about that will ...
Angus Robertson SNP
Indeed. That is yet another reason why the bill should be consigned to the dustbin of history. I will come back to the Labour amendment, which I very much we...
Sarah Boyack (Lothian) (Lab) Lab
It would be helpful to know what changes to the bill the cabinet secretary is suggesting so that we can get proper transparency from the Scottish Government ...
Angus Robertson SNP
Indeed, and that is what we have already done. The amendments have been tabled in committee. I am grateful for the support of Labour members on that committe...
Donald Cameron (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Con
I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests, which shows that I am a member of the Faculty of Advocates. It is not often that I get to...
Fergus Ewing (Inverness and Nairn) (SNP) SNP
The Presiding Officer has, of course, ruled that today’s parliamentary proceedings can continue. I recall that, during the 2016 referendum on EU membership,...
Donald Cameron Con
I am not quite sure of the purpose of that intervention. I voted remain; that is on the record. I am not naive about the politics of this debate. The cabine...
Jenni Minto (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) SNP
Will the member take an intervention?
Stuart McMillan (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) SNP
Will the member take an intervention?
Donald Cameron Con
No. I have already taken an intervention. Today’s debate is contrary to the principle of proper and objective scrutiny by the Parliament. By holding the deb...
Sarah Boyack (Lothian) (Lab) Lab
Today, we are again debating the fallout of Brexit, which is a situation entirely of the Tory Government’s own making. I think that we are now on our third T...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Liam McArthur) LD
I advise members in the chamber that there is quite a bit of time in hand, so you will certainly get the time back for any interventions that you take. I ca...
Willie Rennie (North East Fife) (LD) LD
Here we are, again. Frustratingly, we are stuck in yet another debate about process. The UK Conservative Government is being cavalier, but I cannot help but...
Fergus Ewing SNP
I am most grateful to Willie Rennie for giving way, and I promise that I will not be at all “processy”. I think that he invented that word. There is not much...
Willie Rennie LD
Now it is Mr Fergus Ewing who is inventing words and putting them in Ed Davey’s mouth. Ed Davey is very pro-European. He has made the case for a closer relat...
Bob Doris (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) SNP
Willie Rennie mentioned a federal UK, which sounds a bit processy. How can we really stand up for Scotland’s interests? Surely the best way is by scrapping B...
Willie Rennie LD
A federalism debate would be the process debate to finish all process debates—I hope including the process debate about independence that seems never, ever t...
The Deputy Presiding Officer LD
We move to the open debate. Again, I note that we have plenty of time in hand. 15:15
Jenni Minto (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) SNP
I will open with a slightly amended quotation from a novel that was written on Jura almost 75 years ago. It is George Orwell’s “Nineteen Eighty-Four”. “It w...
Jim Fairlie (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) SNP
The editorial director of Le Monde, Sylvie Kauffman, said, a couple of years ago, “Watching the long descent of Westminster into something resembling hell h...
Sarah Boyack Lab
Will you tell us where in the motion, as amended by our amendment, it says that we are staying in the European Union? This is about retained EU law, so there...
The Deputy Presiding Officer LD
Through the chair, please.
Jim Fairlie SNP
I am not entirely convinced where Sarah Boyack’s intervention comes from. I am talking about the fact that her party is now entirely committed to Brexit. If...
Alex Rowley (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Lab
The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill does not, in itself, make any major policy changes directly. It is a framework bill that provides extensive ...
Kaukab Stewart (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) SNP
I make no apology for starting my speech by expressing my on-going dismay and anger at the position that Scotland finds itself in with regard to EU membershi...
Alex Rowley Lab
It is disappointing to hear the approach that you are taking. Labour has opposed the bill at Westminster and we are absolutely opposed to it here. You seem t...