Statement from Civil Society Alliance

The current phase of the Civil Society Alliance project draws to a close on the 31st December 2024.

Over the past three years, we have navigated a challenging period for civil society, marked by a time of political turbulence.

We would like to express our deepest gratitude to our funders, the Legal Education Foundation (LEF) for their invaluable support in making this project possible. Special thanks to Julia Himmrich, who oversees the foundation’s policy work, including the Fairer Systems funding strand, and to her predecessor, Emily McCarron, for their commitment to our mission.

We also extend heartfelt thanks to our Project Manager, Rosalind Stevens, whose dedication has laid the groundwork for a stronger civil society voice in Westminster.

We would particularly like to thank all our Members, associates, and supporters who have been the backbone in making this collaboration of civil society work from day one. Whether you’ve subscribed to our newsletter, contributed to our events, written articles, or led discussions, we are very grateful.  

We will likely approach many of the organisations that formed and supported the work of the Civil Society Alliance over the last few years to get a sense of the sector’s needs and priorities in the years ahead.  

If you are interested in being part of that conversation, please get in touch with either

Kevin Hanratty - kevin@humanrightsconsortium.org or Charles Whitmore - cwhitmore@wcva.cymru

Thank you all for your support during this important journey. We look forward to exploring new ways of working together in the future.

Devolution in a post Brexit landscape: A civil society perspective

Join us at 2.00 pm on Tuesday, 17 December 2024 for the launch of the Civil Society Alliance’s independent research report, Devolution in a Post-Brexit Landscape: A civil society perspective.

Chaired by Dr Katy Hayward, Professor of Political Sociology at Queen’s University Belfast, this is a must-attend event for anyone interested in the future of devolved governance in the UK and the role of civil society in shaping post-Brexit policy landscapes in the UK and beyond.

Writing in a personal capacity the authors present their in-depth analysis of the tensions between the UK and devolved governments as a result of previous regulatory strategies.  

Our distinguished panel of academics will share their expert analysis around the following themes:

 Common Frameorks; Devolution and Divergence: Dr Lisa Claire Whitten

Devolved governments powers to change and replace assimilated law: Anurag Deb and Dr Nicholas Kilford

The UK Internal Market Act:  Prof Thomas Horsley and Prof Dan Wincott

 The discussion will explore:

• The tensions that arose because of the post Brexit regulatory strategies adopted by the UK government

• The impact on the relationship between the UK government and the devolved governments in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland

• The implications for the UK government’s commitment to resetting these relationships

• How regulatory strategies have created tensions across various policy areas, with a specific focus on the implications for civil society

• A checklist of key issues for the UK government to consider as part of its review of the post-Brexit regulatory framework.

Register now to find out more

Strengthening UK-EU relations and safeguarding citizens rights

Since the UK’s departure from the EU ensuring that EU citizens in the UK ahd UK citizens in the EU have access to their full rights under the Withdrawal Agreement remains a central priority for many of our members.

The EU delegation in London continues to be very proactive in bringing together EU and UK civil society to promote people-to-people contacts between policy makers and local initiatives.

In a powerful gathering on 12 November 2024, the EU Delegation, in partnership with EU Member States, hosted the EU Citizens' Gathering and the very first EmpowerEU Awards to celebrate achievements in the EU community in the UK. The day brought together UK politicians, EU representatives, researchers and civil society organisations representing EU citizens across the UK to discuss shared challenges and foster relationships.

The EmpowerEU awards recognise outstanding achievements of those advocating for EU citizens' rights. The Civil Society Alliance would like to congratulate all those organisations shortlisted for awards, including our members and associates: the3Million won the outstanding achievement award and Settled were commended for their dedication to supporting vulnerable EU citizens

Engage - Empower - Connect

Young people in the UK remain at the center of the EU-UK relationship. With over 12 million young people (18-30), youth is essential in building stronger connections between the UK and the EU. Programmes such as Erasmus+ and other cross-border opportunities were widely recognized as key tools for fostering cooperation and creating opportunities for young people from all backgrounds.

Building on the success of last year’s inaugural event at UCL, the expanded 2024 EU-UK Youth Dialogue took place on 6-7 November 2024 at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). Organized by the EU Delegation to the UK in partnership with LSE European Institute, this year’s event brought together over 150 young leaders from across the UK and the EU to discuss how they can contribute to shape the future of EU-UK relations.

Product Regulation and Metrology bill

On Tuesday, 8 October 2024, the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill (PRMB) had its second reading in the House of Lords. The Bill underpins the Labour government’s approach to managing regulatory alignment with – or divergence from – existing and proposed EU law.

The Bill covers the marketing or use of products in the UK, units of measurement and the quantities in which goods are marketed. The intention is to enable the UK to maintain high product standards, supporting businesses and economic growth, by giving the UK Parliament the power to update relevant laws. The aim is to be able to adapt to new technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI), and reflect the shift in both what consumers buy and how they buy.

The UK’s product regulatory framework, most of which is derived from EU law developed over the past four decades, covers most consumer products and a significant number of industrial products, from cosmetics and toys, through pyrotechnics to heavy machinery and pressure equipment.

The Civil Society Alliance welcomes the development of a flexible regulatory framework that supports our objective of a high standards UK. We recognise the importance of the UK having the choice to mirror or diverge from updated EU rules in a way that supports business and economic growth, provided that such regulatory divergence respects devolved competences and does not create barriers to trade.

The PRMB gives the UK government (UKG) specific powers to make changes to legislation to manage divergence and takes a UK-wide approach. The power is broad enough to create new criminal offences or expand the scope of existing criminal offences when dealing with the enforcement of the regulations. The Bill empowers the UKG without jurisdictional limit, meaning that the UKG may (at least in principle), without devolved consent, alter product regulations in areas of devolved competence.

As part of its agenda for change, the UKG has pledged to reset the relationship with the devolved governments in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland - to improve working relations, collaborate on policy and strengthen the Sewel Convention.

The notes accompanying the Bill identify those aspects of the Bill for which a Legislative Consent Motion (LCM) has been sought. The Scottish Government (SG) has highlighted the lack of a consent mechanism within the bill to prevent the UKG using powers in devolved areas without the consent of Scottish Ministers - even though this could lead to divergence from EU law on devolved matters and/or repeal Scottish legislation. The Senedd Cymru, while welcoming the development of a UK wide product safety regime as part of the wider ambition to establish and maintain an effective UK internal market - share concerns that the UKG could use certain powers in a way which would significantly impinge on devolved competence, both in the wider sphere of economic development, environmental protection and other areas.

We look forward to the relevant legislative consent being obtained from the devolved governments before the Bill is passed.

In order to ensure dual access to both the UK internal market and the EU single market, Northern Ireland applies certain EU product regulations and metrology rules under the Windsor Framework. The PRMB Bill gives the UK Minister the choice whether to accept upcoming regulatory divergence between the UK and EU provided that this is consistent with the UK internal market.

Whilst we welcome the decision to implement changes to the product safety regime through primary legislation, more detail is needed of the expected impacts of the specific changes to be made through secondary legislation. This is especially important given that the current regulatory framework includes over 2500 pages of secondary legislation.

General Election News

Following the PM’s announcement on 22 May 2024, Parliament will be prorogued on Friday 24 May 2024 and formally dissolved on Thursday 30 May 2024 - in accordance with the Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022. This leaves only 2 days for the “wash up” process. The General Election will take place 25 (working days) later on Thursday 4 July 2024. Parliament will reconvene on Thursday, 9 July with the King’s Speech expected to take place on Wednesday 17 July 2024.

When Parliament is dissolved, every seat in the House of Commons becomes vacant. All business in the House comes to an end. MPs stop representing their constituencies. There will be no MPs until after the general election. Members of the House of Lords are appointed, not elected so retain their positions.

Over 100 MPs have already announced that they will not be standing for re-election, 68 of whom are Conservatives. Parliamentary constituency boundary changes since the last General Election mean that MPs whose seats are changing significantly – or even being abolished – may have to choose whether to attempt to gain selection as a candidate in a different seat or to stand down.

Public bills cannot be carried over from one parliament to the next. The period of the last few days of a parliament, during which unfinished business must be agreed by both Houses or lost at dissolution, is known as ‘wash-up’. During this period, because there is not enough time to complete parliamentary consideration in the usual way, the Government is reliant on the cooperation of the Opposition to secure its legislation. The Government and the Opposition reach agreements on the bills—or parts of bills—that should be hurried through their remaining parliamentary stages to reach the statute book before dissolution.

As noted above, Parliament only has 2 days for this wash up period. At the time of the announcement of the the General Election, 16 government bills were making their way through Parliament. These included the Data Protection and Digital Information bill scheduled to begin Report stage in the House of Lords on 10 June 2024. Civil society has raised several concerns about the bill and its implications for human rights - including the right to privacy, non-discrimination, and access to justice. At the time of writing, the bill has not been tabled for wash up so will fall.

What does the Data Protection and Digital Information bill mean for human rights? Join the conversation

When: Online on Tuesday 21 May, 2024 2.00 to 3.00 pm.

The Data Protection and Digital Information bill  (DPDI) was introduced to the House of Commons on 8 November 2023, swiftly followed by 3rd reading and Report on 29 November 2023, adding 156 pages of amendments and 38 new clauses, leaving little opportunity for proper scrutiny of a bill that “gives the Government sweeping powers and limits the rights of our fellow citizens, the public.” (Sir Chris Bryant). Civil society organisations have raised a range of concerns around the bill,  highlighted by Peers during the recent Committee stage in the House of Lords.

Contributors explained how the bill would engage key rights and access to justice issues and the impact on all citizens, especially but not exclusively those who are vulnerable.

The focus was on human rights protections that are at risk, including the right to privacy and non-discrimination.

Mariano delli Santi, Open Rights Group highlighted the issues from ORG’s Hands off our data campaign;  Tanya Krupiy, Newcastle University, explained how the increasing use of AI impacts on all human rights and access to resources that are crucial to everyone’s  wellbeing; Eleanor Duhs. Partner from Bates Wells gave examples of how the UK’s data protection standards have already fallen; and James Farrar, CEO, of the Worker Information Exchange alerted us to the barriers workers face challenging decisions made through ADM including around pay setting, work allocation and robo firing, illustrated by the recent Ola cabs and Uber rulings.

The day after our meeting, the PM announced the dissolution of Parliament before the General Election on Thursday July 4 2024. The DPDI bill was not included in the list of bills for Royal Assent and has therefore fallen. It remains to be seen whether a data protection and digital information bill will feature in the King’s Speech, expected to take place on Wednesday 17 July 2024.

Reference Materials

Dr Tanya Krupiy,  Newcastle University: Meeting the Chimera: How the Cedaw Can Address Digital Discrimination

https://eprints.ncl.ac.uk/file_store/production/278922/E7599EE0-5B91-4185-8D20-8B6F4086774B.pdf

 Krupiy, Sheinin

Disability Discrimination in the Digital Realm: How the ICRPD Applies to Artificial Intelligence Decision-Making Processes and Helps in Determining the State of International Human Rights Law   https://academic.oup.com/hrlr/article/23/3/ngad019/7237939

 Dr Tanya Krupiy, Newcastle University

The need to update the Artificial Intelligence Act to make it human rights compliant — The Digital Constitutionalist

https://digi-con.org/the-need-to-update-the-artificial-intelligence-act-to-make-it-human-rights-compliant/

 Dr Tanya Krupiy, Newcastle University: Artificial Intelligence – the need to update the Equality Act 2010

https://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/artificial-intelligence-the-need-to-update-the-equality-act-2010/

Eleanor Duhs, Partner and Head of Data Privacy, Bates Wells, The Data Protection (Fundamental Rights and Freedoms) (Amendment) Regulations 2023 – a  failure to contain damaging uncertainty

The Data Protection (Fundamental Rights and Freedoms) (Amendment) Regulations 2023 – a  failure to contain damaging uncertainty | Bates Wells

 Historic digital rights win for Workers Information Exchange and the ADCU over Uber and Ola at Amsterdam Court of Appeal

https://www.workerinfoexchange.org/post/historic-digital-rights-win-for-wie-and-the-adcu-over-uber-and-ola-at-amsterdam-court-of-appeal

--------------------------------------------------

Strengthening civil society impact on Westminster in the years ahead

Leading civil society experts from across the UK gathered in Cardiff Bay on 21-22 March 2024 to identify key shared priorities in the run up to the General Election and beyond. Funded by the Legal Education Foundation, this high-profile event was hosted by WCVA and the Wales Governance Centre, in partnership with the Civil Society Alliance and the Human Rights Consortia in Northern Ireland and Scotland.

Ruth Marks, Chief Executive of WCVA, welcomed over 90 delegates from across all four parts of the UK to the event, being “held at a crucial time for the sector as we respond to new challenges and operate in a tight financial climate.”

In his keynote address, the Secretary of State for Wales, David TC Davies, spoke of the valued role civil society has to play in UK policy making and in connecting communities to decision makers.

Academics, campaigners and charity leaders from Scotland, Northern Ireland, England and Wales provided their insight into the challenges and opportunities of bringing community voices from each of the four parts of the UK to debate developments at Westminster. Topics included the operation of devolution, how charities engage with devolved and central decision makers, and debates and developments around constitutional reform.

“We respect you, we admire you and we thank you” said Lilian Greenwood MP, Shadow Minister for Civil Society in her opening remarks, posing the question of how best to support the huge breadth of civil society and unlock the potential for change and renewal.

Former First Minister for Wales Mark Drakeford MS shared his six suggestions for influencing success: “Be authentic - Be authoritative - Be local - Be there (where decisions are made) - Be vocal - Be bold”

A great many ideas and suggestions were discussed throughout the two days (general election planning, asks around civil society engagement with UK Government, asks around future devolution reform in key areas like equality and human rights…)

Photographer: Natasha Hirst

#4NationsCivilSociety Civil Society Alliance Conferences and Events

Setting a new agenda - delivering on promises for a high standards UK

A core objective of the Civil Society Alliance is for a high standards UK. The 2019 Conservative Party manifesto also committed to raising standards for workers’ rights, environmental protections, and protecting consumers.[i]

The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act (REUL), which entered into force on 30 June 2023, is an excellent opportunity for the Government to implement those commitments.

Politics of REUL

The Government’s original plan was to ‘make a bonfire’ of all REUL through a sunset clause that would have seen everything not marked for retention automatically fall away on 31 December 2023.  It is reasonable to conclude this was a politically motivated approach. Liz Truss launched her leadership run off campaign by promising a “sunset” for all EU-derived laws by the end of 2023.  Rishi Sunak’s response was a campaign video showing him putting all EU laws through the shredder and pledging a review in his first 100 days in office.

It is disappointing that politics got in the way of proper debate and meaningful consultation. Exchanges in both Houses were diminished by rhetoric accusing “Remainers” of resisting changes. This to the visible frustration of those MPs and Peers who wanted their legitimate concerns about the legislation to be addressed – particularly around the cliff edge of the initial sunset clause.  It was a missed opportunity to develop a vision for a high standards UK and to “restore Parliamentary control.”[ii]  

Introducing a more pragmatic approach

Kemi Badenoch, Secretary of State for Business and Trade’s decision to remove the automatic sunset clause from the bill[iii] and her assurances that REUL “is not a bonfire of regulations. We are not arsonists,” was a welcome and significant turning point.  Nevertheless, serious questions remain around the process the Government will use “to get rid of laws that we don’t want”[iv] particularly as there is no provision to include civil society in “the proper assessment and consultation to be carried out.[v] 

Openness and transparency

Given the absence of provision in the Act for public consultation, what are the arrangements for ensuring there will be effective Parliamentary scrutiny, particularly as the Commons repeatedly voted down Lords amendments designed to do just that?  Section 17 of the Act requires only that the REUL dashboard be kept up to date, and that between now and 23 June 2026 six monthly reports of revoked and reformed REUL must be laid before Parliament, alongside plans for the next reporting period.

In May 2023, Civil Society Alliance wrote an open letter to the Secretary of State for Business and Trade calling for the Government to demonstrate its commitment to transparency and a high standards UK.  We asked the Government to publish details of further aspects of REUL that it does not intend to retain, alongside the rationale for their decision-making. Given its expertise on how different elements of REUL impact individuals and communities, civil society is well placed to help inform those decisions.

Should they stay or should they go?

Throughout the Parliamentary process, Ministers repeatedly gave assurances of the Government’s commitments to ensure there would be no lowering of environmental protections or standards[vi], with a better focus on renewables[vii].  There was no intention to abandon our strong record on workers’ rights[viii] . Ministers repeated their commitment to maintain the UK’s leading role in the promotion and protection of human rights, equality, and the rule of law[ix]. Consumers would be protected from unsafe products and would benefit from the promotion of robust food standards both nationally and internationally[x]. Moreover, the devolved Governments could rest assured that the concurrent nature of the powers in the Act was not intended to affect the devolution settlements, nor to influence decision-making in devolved Governments[xi].

Accountability for any backtracking

So how are those assurances playing out so far?  Over the summer recess, the Government published several consultations under its ‘smarter regulation’ banner.  These include the long awaited consultation on product safety, which advocates a more “agile framework”. Proposals include categorisation of products by hazard and the introduction of voluntary e-labelling.  It also includes the proposal to establish a derogation process, building on the COVID-19 emergency response measures for the supply of PPE, that would enable businesses to apply for temporary regulatory easements to speed up supply of essential products in emergencies.

The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP), the independent body established under the Environment Act 2021, continues to challenge Environment Secretary, Therese Coffey, over her stance on the National Emission Ceilings Regulations (NECR). The NECR include national emission reduction targets, which are set for five key pollutants. Whilst committing to keeping “most” of the regulations during the passage of the REUL bill[xii], the Environment Secretary insists that regulations 9 and 10 must go to “reduce administrative burdens and aid transparency regarding air quality emissions policy.”   The regulations require consultation, preparation, and implementation of a national air pollution control programme to reduce pollutants including nitrogen oxides and ammonia.

At Report stage of the Levelling up and Regeneration bill in the House of Lords, without prior public consultation, the Government introduced a series of amendments for a new Schedule, which if passed would have potentially “disapplied nature protection laws to allow pollution without mitigation in England’s most sensitive nature sites”.

The current nutrient neutrality scheme requires developers to improve local habitats or pay for “credits” to offset the nitrate and phosphate pollution of rivers caused by run-off from new construction in protected areas. The Government argued the changes were needed to encourage housebuilders to build an additional 100k homes, promising to double Natural England’s wetland funding to £280m (funded from the public purse) to meet the Environment Act’s requirements.

Caroline Lucas MP raised an urgent question in the House of Commons asking the Secretary of State for Levelling up, Housing and Communities why the Government were using the Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill to scrap environmental protections on nutrient neutrality - thereby “backtracking on commitments made during the passage of the REUL bill that leaving the EU would not lead to a weakening of environmental standards”.  In the event the proposed amendments were rejected by the Lords by 203 votes to 156[xiii]. 

Open and accountable lawmaking 

Despite rhetoric to the contrary, the REUL Act has the potential to enable Ministers to make policy changes using mechanisms that were not headlined as such.  It is difficult for Parliamentarians, let alone civil society to keep track of the changes and understand their impacts.

For example, on the first day of the new Parliamentary session, the Business and Trade Minister Nusrat Ghani, published a written statement announcing a further 93 revocations of REUL through the Revocation and Sunset Disapplication Regulations 2023. These were described as “redundant pieces of legislation that do not reflect policy changes.” No full impact assessment would be needed because "no, or no significant, impact on the private, voluntary, or public sector is foreseen.”[xiv]   Working with other civil society organisations we were eventually able to identify the list of REUL to be revoked and reasonably satisfy ourselves that this was the case. 

This however begs the question of what happens when there are potential policy changes being made without consultation and Parliamentary scrutiny? The Government may claim not to be arsonists in their drive to remove EU laws that it considers redundant. Given their failure to provide proper accountability, transparency, or parliamentary oversight in this process, it may still prove necessary to stand poised at the fire alarm for some time to come.

Rosalind Stevens, Civil Society Alliance, September 2023 

[i] See pages 5 and 33.

[ii] Reference by Lord Hope, House of Lords 15 May 2023, Hansard col. 18 referring to letter from Executive sent to Peers by special messenger on 6 February 2023 (Lord Judge refers, Hansard col 1001.

[iii] Announced in her Regulatory Reform Update statement to the House on 10 May 2023.

[iv] Evidence to the European Scrutiny Committee, 6 June 2023

[v] As set out in the response from Nusrat Ghani MP, Minister for Industry and Economic Security, dated 21 June 2023, to the Civil Society Alliance open letter of 17 May 2023.

[vi]  “I can simply repeat the assurances that Ministers have given—ad nauseam, dare I say—that our environmental standards are world leading and will continue to be so” – quote from Solicitor General, Consideration of Lords amendments, 24 May 2023, Hansard col.329

[vii] Nusrat Ghani, Minister for Industry and Economic Security, 3rd reading, 18 January 2023, Hansard, col. 399

[viii] Ibid, Hansard col. 400. Commitments reiterated by the Minister for Industry and Security, in response to Civil Society open letter. 

[ix] Baroness Neville-Rolfe, Lords Report Stage, 15 May 2023, Hansard column 74

[x] Solicitor General, Consideration of Lords amendments, House of Commons, 24 May 2023, Hansard col. 328

[xi] Baroness Neville-Rolfe, Lords Report stage, 15 May 2023, Hansard col. 74

[xii] Lord Callanan, Lords Report Stage, 17 May 2023, Hansard, col.321

[xiii] Including by Conservative Peer, Lord Deben, commenting on what the proposed amendments would mean if passed “That means that the British people are now less protected from government mistakes than any country in the rest of Europe. I make no comment about Brexit, but that is where this House and the other place have left the people of Britain” Wednesday, 13 September 2023 Hansard col. 1045.

[xiv] Explanatory memorandum, para 12 accompanied by line by line explainer

When we focus on shared values, we find belonging

The Common Ground project is delivered in partnership by Fondazione Giacomo Brodolini, the3million and British Future. Writing for CSA member the3million, Project Manager Ola Sobieraj, shares her experience of leading on the Common Ground project. and working with EU communities in the UK.

I am delighted to introduce myself as a new Project Manager at the3million, an organisation which I have followed and admired for its clear vision, resolve and results in campaigning for the rights of EU citizens in the UK post Brexit. I am very excited to be working on our new project Common Ground.

I am Polish, Poland is my home and I am attached to my Polish heritage. I also have a deep sense of European identity even though Poland only joined the EU in 2004 which was in my twenties, and in fact, after I had already come to the UK. I have lived in Northern Ireland ever since and it has become my home too because this is where my loved ones are. Until the Brexit vote.

The referendum and the toxic narrative around it undermined my sense of belonging in the UK and as a result I have become more determined to get involved in public life in an attempt to ensure that my own and the collective voice of EU citizens are properly heard, and our life and rights here are secure and our contributions valued.

This was reflected in my career journey as I moved from coordinating a network of migrant led organisations to managing a frontline service supporting people with EU Settlement Scheme applications.

During the last few years I have met and worked with many European, non-European, British, Irish and Northern Irish people from a whole spectrum of creeds and backgrounds and discovered that despite apparent differences, there were always some values and beliefs we shared. When we focused on those and looked forward, we were able to support each other and feel we all belong here.

The opportunity to join the3million came along at a time when I felt the need to move beyond providing immigration advice to working more strategically on a bigger arena towards effecting a systemic change.

Common Ground is just the ticket!

We have an ambitious goal to foster a positive relationship between the EU and the UK by means of celebrating our shared experiences and shared values and identifying opportunities for collaborations based on those values.

In practice, it means we would love to hear from any person or organisation interested in working across divides to empower EU citizens to thrive in the UK and join a network of like minded people sharing knowledge, good practice and identifying opportunities for collective actions.

the3million will facilitate this network and equip you with tools to engage in meaningful conversations, collaborate and campaign. We have an exciting and varied programme of activities including local engagement events, workshops, online working groups, UK and international conferences as well as arts, journalism and twinning campaigns.

If you’re interested in finding out more or getting involved, please contact us to let us know. We would love to hear from you if you are an EU community worker, leader, volunteer or if you have links with any informal EU citizens’ groupings.

Can lessons from the passage of the Genetic Technology Act help us to raise a louder collective voice?

Liz O’Neill, Director of GM Freeze, reflects on the recent passage of the Genetic Technology Act. What lessons should we learn to help civil society push for more collaborative, effective, and accountable law making in the future?

Genetic Engineering (regardless of branding) has always been controversial subject and the passing of the Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Act was no exception. However, as GM Freeze Director Liz O’Neill explains, concerns about the new law extend far beyond its focus on removing safeguards on the manipulation of plant and animal DNA.

The Genetic Technology Act creates a new class of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Styled as “precision bred organisms”, these GMOs will be released without any requirement for independent risk assessment, anti-contamination measures or labelling on foodstuffs. Already out of step with public opinion, the problems quickly escalate when you discover that the Act’s definition of “precision breeding” is legally vague, highly contested and will be policed by an Advisory Committee of which every member holds potential or actual conflicts of interest with the biotechnology industry, the main financial beneficiaries of the changes in the law.

The Genetic Technology Act only applies directly in England and little heed was paid to the decisions by both the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Senedd to withhold legislative consent. The high profile given to the fate of sausages in the operation of the Northern Ireland Protocol and Windsor Framework demonstrate the complexity of managing divergence within the UK food chain and the influence of the Internal Markets Act will only add to the confusion.

Poor understanding (or willful ignoring?) of the true impacts of the proposed new legislation was one of many reasons why the Regulatory Policy Committee found the Government’s Impact Assessment for this bill “not fit for purpose”. It’s obvious to most people that removing longstanding safeguards will impact the entire food and farming sector but all of Defra’s forecasts and calculations focused on just 75 seed breeders - some 0.03% of the estimated number of businesses engaged in farming or food and drink manufacturing in the UK.

Most provisions in the Genetic Technology Act won’t come into effect for several years because so much of the detail has been left to secondary legislation. There’s also still a chance for achieving one of our key demands as the Food Standards Agency’s independent board recently chose not to rule out some form of labelling for “precision bred food and feed”.

With opinion polls strongly suggesting a change of government at the next General Election,  it is tempting to conclude that there is little incentive for the current administration to concern itself with how the changes will work on the ground. Look a little more closely and you might wonder if their decision to push ahead with legislative changes that had been overwhelming rejected in Defra’s own public consultation was always really about sending signals. A signal to business investors that the Government has their back when it comes to patented technologies. A signal to the UK’s devolved nations that the they won’t be ‘getting their own countries back’ anytime soon. And a signal to civil society that we should know our place. 

We do, of course, absolutely know where are place should be: at the heart of public policy development! The Civil Society Alliance gives us a louder collective voice and GM Freeze is keen to play our part by sharing what we have learnt from fighting a deeply flawed – and hugely unpopular – bill. We didn’t win much but we have a learnt a huge amount along the way and want to put that experience to work as an ally of others defending public rights, standards and protections in any field. Please get in touch to discuss how we might be able to support your work by sharing some of the lessons we’ve learnt the hard way.

Liz O’Neill, Director of GM Freeze, 26 June, 2023

Civil Society Alliance urges government to accept REUL bill amendments at ping pong

Today the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) bill returns to the House of Lords for further consideration. This follows the government’s rejection of key Lords’ amendments in the House of Commons on 24 May 2023.

The Civil Society Alliance is one of many signatories to a letter urging the goverment to accept the revised amendments being tabled today. The amendments proposed by crossbenchers Lord Anderson of Ipswich and Lord Hope of Craighead would offer parliament more of a say over potential changes to important laws. The proposed amendment from Lord Krebs would help demonstrate the government’s commitment to the environment by adding a safeguard for existing protections.

As it stands, the bill would allow future ministers, of this government or the next, to change or remove vital protections for consumers, workers or the environment with extremely limited parliamentary or public scrutiny. It is an unprecedented shift from parliamentary sovereignty to the Executive - which undermines the UK’s democracy, constitution and the role of devolved and central Parliaments.

Dear Secretary of State ---- civil society speaks out about the REUL bill

Rt Hon Kemi Badenoch

Secretary of State for Business and Trade

1 Victoria Street

London SW1H 0ET

17 May 2023

Dear Secretary of State

Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill

We write as the Civil Society Alliance representing the views of over 50 civil society groups from across the UK. We welcome the UK Government’s announcement that it intends to reform REUL, rather than automatically revoke all of it at the end of 2023.  The reform of REUL should be an excellent opportunity to strengthen our laws and protections. This letter sets out some of our key concerns to ensure that our rights and standards are not lost or watered down but strengthened.

Ensure that we maintain and enhance a high standards UK

A core objective of the Civil Society Alliance is for a high standards UK, a vision shared in the 2019 Conservative Party manifesto, including in relation to workers’ rights, environmental protection, and consumer rights. 

The powers included in the bill to reform REUL, particularly those in clause 16, will continue to create regulatory uncertainty. Well-designed regulation that benefits the economy and ensures fair competition is essential for building public trust, particularly given the rapid acceleration of technological change. Clause 16.5 of the bill appears to do the opposite by precluding the raising of standards in future that would ‘increase the regulatory burden.’

Continue to publish and consult on rationale and plans for REUL

Whilst we welcome the removal of the current sunset in the bill, we would like to understand the decision-making process used to identify the 587 pieces of subordinate legislation and retained direct EU legislation to be scrapped and the underlying justification for their inclusion. 

The UK Government should demonstrate its commitment to transparency and a high standards UK by continuing to publish details of further aspects of REUL that it does not intend to retain, together with the rationale for this decision-making.  Civil society from across the UK should be given the opportunity to help inform the final decision-making through a public consultation. Civil society is best placed to provide the expertise needed on the ways in which different elements of REUL do or do not affect individuals and communities.

Safeguard proper scrutiny and civil society engagement

While the removal of the sunset is a step in the right direction, the bill will still undermine the UK’s democracy, constitution, and the role of the devolved and central parliaments by virtue of wide-ranging powers given to ministers to reform REUL. Rather than restoring control this bill is an unprecedented shift from parliamentary sovereignty to the Executive, who will be able to make changes to key protections and safeguards without proper scrutiny.

Respect devolution

While the extension of powers to make consequential or transitional and saving provisions on the devolved governments is a step in the right direction, we remain concerned about the bill’s impact at the devolved level. There is still no requirement placed on UK ministers to seek devolved consent when exercising the wide-ranging regulatory powers in the bill. As these are concurrent, this will give the UK Government relatively unchecked law-making powers in areas of devolved competence.

The new power to preserve legislation listed in the Schedule (Sunset of subordinate legislation and retained direct EU legislation) has a tight deadline set at 31 October 2023. This would mean laying regulations at the devolved level by the start of October at the latest.  In practice this will provide very little time for devolved authorities to consult and scrutinise the list and to take the steps necessary to preserve any REUL included in the schedule that intersects with devolved competencies.

Protect human rights commitments in Northern Ireland

By failing to define any screening process for legislation that is set to be removed the bill also creates the possibility that legislation critical to the fulfilment of the UK Government's 'Article 2' human rights commitments in the Windsor Framework could be lost. While the bill creates new powers for devolved ministers to preserve certain laws up for removal, the lack of a functioning Northern Ireland Executive will leave the process of ensuring Article 2 compliance more difficult, with no ministers in place to preserve important legislation. 

We would value the opportunity to meet with you and your department to share civil society knowledge and expertise to ensure we have both effective regulation and high standards in the UK.

Yours sincerely

Rosalind Stevens, Project Manager, The Civil Society Alliance

Charles Whitmore, Wales Civil Society Forum coordinator.

Kit Stoner, Chief Executive, Bat Conservation Trust

Maggie Lennon, Director, Bridges Programmes

BRACE Committee, Building Resistance Against the Climate Emergency (BRACE)

Ruth Harding, Clerk, Cardiff Quaker Meeting

Sam Smith, CEO, C-Change

Joanne Welch, Founder, CEDAWinLAW

Colin Lee, Chief Executive, CEMVO Scotland

Megan McDermott, Project Officer, Centre for Cross Border Studies

Jules Wagstaff, Climate and Community

Sam Ward, Head, Climate Cymru

Jill Gough, Director, CND Cymru

Committee, Coal Action Network (CAN)

Grant Peisley, Director, Datblygiadau Egni Gwledig (DEG)

Cat Murphy, Executive Director, Engender Scotland

Benji Brown, Policy Officer, Environmental Rights Centre for Scotland

Liz Shannon, Parliamentary & Policy Adviser, Equally Ours

Lesley Punter, Political Engagement, Extinction Rebellion Cymru

Liz O’Neill, Director, GM Freeze

Vicky Moller, Grwp Resilience

Irene Oldfather, Director of Strategy, Health and Social Care Alliance Scotland (the ALLIANCE)

Danielle Roberts, Senior Policy and Development Officer, Here NI

Kevin Hanratty, Director, Human Rights Consortium

Mhairi Snowden, Director, Human Rights Consortium Scotland

Leo Starrs-Cunningham, Convenor, Inclusion Scotland

Helen Flynn, Head of Policy, Just Fair

Hannah Harvey, Limitless Energy

David Williams, Board Member, Llais y Goedwig

Kendall Bousquet, Advocacy Officer, Migrant Centre NI

Sarah Vibert, Chief Executive, NCVO

Sarah Thomas, Public Affairs Officer, National Federation of Women’s Institutes, Wales

Geoff Nuttall, Head of Policy and Public Affairs, NICVA

Prof. Robert Moore, North Wales Regional Equality Network

Marion Davis, Head of Policy, One Parent Families, Scotland

Josie Cohen, Head of Policy, Pesticide Action Network (PAN)

Amy Healey, Pesticide Collaboration

Shameem Ahmad, CEO, Public Law Project

Anna Fowlie, Chief Executive, Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations (SCVO)

Stuart Callison, Chief Executive, St Andrew's First Aid

Sarah Thomas, Secretariat, Stop Climate Chaos Cymru

Margaret Minhinnick, Director, Sustainable Wales

Suzanne Iuppa, Director, The Co-production Network for Wales

Dr Neil Lewis, Director, TrydaNi

Phoebe Clay & Emma Rose, Co-Directors, Unchecked

Tom Brake, Director, Unlock Democracy

Revd Canon Carol Wardman, Chair, Wales & Europe Working Party of Cytûn

Karen Whitfield, Co-Director, Wales Environment Link

Rob McDowall, CEO, Welfare Scotland

Charles Whitmore, Wales Civil Society Forum coordinator, WCVA

Jessica Laimann, WEN Wales (Women's Equality Network Wales)

Cofion Cynnes, Director, West Wales Climate Coalition

Jonna Monaghan, Director, Women’s Platform

Jerry Langford, Public Affairs Manager, The Woodland Trust

Civil society speaks out about the REUL Bill

The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill is the mechanism for implementing the government’s promised ‘Brexit Benefits Bill’. Its potential implications for civil society are huge for all of us who want to see a high standards UK with protection of rights in law.

This Civil Society Alliance webinar, held on 5 April 2023, provided an accessible snapshot about what is in the Bill and why it matters. See the presentation slides and the audio recordings below.

If you have any questions/comments on the presentations please contact us at info@civilsocietyalliance.uk

Delivering a Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland

Human Rights Consortium is calling on the UK Government to deliver the outstanding human rights commitments made a quarter of a century ago in the Belfast / Good Friday Agreement and to protect the rights of people across the United Kingdom. 

The main undelivered commitment is a Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland. A Bill of rights could ensure additional protections for people across a range of rights such as adequate healthcare, access to education and decent housing. This would provide a safety net that everyone in society could rely on to ensure that their rights are protected when things go wrong.

The signatories to the Belfast / Good Friday Agreement committed themselves to ‘the achievement of reconciliation, tolerance, and mutual trust, and to the protection and vindication of the human rights of all.’ 

HRC invites you to sign their petition to #MakeOurFutureFair.

Claiming Restitution: Age, Pensions and women born in the 1950s

French changes to pensions, increasing age of accrual from 62 to 64 and creating a single, universal system earning pension points with each day worked, are argued to favour women – yet this is not so clear. What is clear is that French workers – women and men – have taken to the streets protesting against the changes. The contrast with the French response and the response when the Pensions Act 1995 passed through Westminster is stark: no demonstrations back in 1995, because (unlike the situation in France) those impacted had no notice.

When Westminster changed the law existing since the 1940s, bringing women’s pension age up from 60 to 65 (the age men gained the pension), women were not told. Had they been, demonstrations by women (and male supporters) now taking place would have happened 28 years ago.

The Pensions Act 1995 targeted 1950s-born women in making the change. The then Secretary of Work and Pensions, Peter Lilley, in his Second Reading Speech specifically excluded 1940s women from the change, and targeted 1950s women. The 4th Schedule to the Act set out a time-based plan based on women’s birthdates through that decade. The Schedule showed some women receiving the pension on their birthdate, though later than 60, whilst for others the pension was to be paid later than 60, and not on their birthday.  

When at last notifications began to trickle through, the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) realising – although minimally – its obligation to let those impacted know, 1950s women organised. BackTo60 (claiming full restitution, not a return to the 60-years pension) launched a judicial review action that ran through the High Court to the Court of Appeal, ending in the Supreme Court. The High Court and Court of Appeal dismissed the claims, asserting that men were discriminated against, not women. This ignored the straightforward principle of ‘less favourable treatment’ on a protected characteristic or ground, whether looking to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), EU law, the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), or the 2010 Equality Act. Age and sex are protected characteristics. Targeting 1950s women to bear the brunt of the transition to 65 years meant they were subjected to less favourable treatment than men. Nothing changed for men: having planned their employment and retirement plans for their 65th birthday, unlike 1950s women they did not have to rearrange anything. The women had to rearrange their whole work-life and retirement plans. As to age, singling 1950s women out because they were born in that decade meant less favourable treatment on grounds of age: their date of birth meant, again, they had to rearrange retirement plans and stay on at work or beg for a job – not easy for anyone at an older age, and particularly not for women

The Supreme Court said the claim was ‘out of time’, without stating why. Yet as decisions susceptible to review are made each time the DWP electronically or manually calculates pensions according to age, the ‘delay’ contention is not sustainable and, in any event, was made without any argument or reasons. This, despite both the High Court and Court of Appeal having granted leave to appeal on all grounds in the claim – meaning that both considered there to be an arguable case.

BackTo60 is now lobbying MPs to support 1950s women’s claims through an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) process. The terms of the resolution sought by BackTo60 in respect of all 3.9m women affected, are: an initial lump sum plus additional payments atop the State Pension paid over five years for those whose National Insurance Contributions (NICs) entitle them to compensation calculated according to monies forgone; no tax;  free dental and optician care;  and a named beneficiary should the 1950s woman die during the five-year period. Schedule 4 (and an amendment in the 2007 Pensions Act) shows some 1950s women owed several months restitution, whilst others would require calculation in years. The contention that the money ‘isn’t there’ ignores the women’s having paid in on the basis that their payments would ‘go’ to workers retiring at that time, and subsequent payments in would provide the moneys for their pensions.

In this pensions (lack of) pay-out debacle, 1950s women’s efforts indicate that the 1995 Conservative government and subsequent governments, in failing to redress 1950s women, have not only overlooked the women’s just claims. They have failed to understand that 1950s women cannot be treated with contempt. 1950s women matter, and refuse to go quietly.

Dr Jocelynne A. Scutt

Barrister and Human Rights Lawyer

 jas © 30 March 2023

CALL FOR ACTION

Call upon MPs to join Sir George Howarth's #ADRnow

https://twitter.com/2020Comms/status/1641014398088097792?t=svVR5Z68HSGmROWT2B7cVQ&s=19

The articles within the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provide the foundation for all civil society engagement.

Civil Society Alliance members welcomed Mia Hasenson-Gross, Réné Cassin at our drop in session on 8 February 2023.

René Cassin was a French-Jewish jurist, law professor and judge. He co-drafted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), to which the UK is a signatory, adopted by the UN General Assembly on 10 December 1948. He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1968. You can read his 1968 Nobel speech here.

The René Cassin charity’s small, proactive team campaigns for change in defined human rights areas – through a combination of advocacy, policy analysis, public campaigning and education. They help building the capacity of activists to promote and protect human rights, including through their successful Human Rights Ambassador programme. René Cassin’s voice is one of authority and credibility, drawing on experience to compare historical with contemporary events.

Rene Cassin works to protect and promote the rights of vulnerable individuals and communities – particularly on issues that resonate with the Jewish experience. These include:

1. Hostile Environments – treatment of immigrants, asylum seekers, modern slavery, exploitation of minorities, unlimited detention and safety issues. This can be within the UK or internationally.

2. Discrimination and hate – promoting and supporting solidarity with Travellers, Roma, women refugees and asylum seekers, Uyghurs. Mia highlighted a little-known fact that the worst levels of hate crime in the UK are towards disabled people.

3. Women’s Rights – across the world women face increased domestic violence, unpaid care duties and high rates of unemployment. Although women make up the majority of front-line workers, they are underrepresented in national and global policy-making spaces

4. Socio-economic Rights – Article 25 of UDHR is pertinent here. Despite being one of the richest countries in the world, nearly 8.4 million adults and children living in the UK struggle to access the food they need.

2023 marks the 75th Anniversary of the UDHR. Article 30 alludes to rights not to suffer acts of aggression - like invasion, attack, and occupation. On the eve of the first anniversary of Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine, Rene Cassin and the Coalition for Genocide Response are hosting an online event on 23 February, when two legal experts will explain how Putin can be held to account. Sign up for the event here.

Civil Society Alliance REUL Briefing to Peers

The 2nd reading of the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill has its second reading in the House of Lords on Monday 6 February 2023.

The REUL Bill goes to the heart of the UK’s democracy and constitution. It represents a fundamental reconsideration of parliamentary sovereignty that gives the Executive sweeping powers to make changes to existing legislation without detailed scrutiny of Parliament. As advocates for a strong civil society voice in developing collaborative, consistent, open, effective, and accountable governance, the Civil Society Alliance has written to Peers to highlight our concerns about this Bill. Read our briefing here

EESC report sets out civil society views on the implementation of the EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement

Today the EESC Follow up Committee published their report on the state of implementation of the EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement, as perceived by UK Civil Society Organisations (CSO)and other relevant stakeholders. The purpose of the information report is to contribute to the political dialogue between the EU and the UK by providing reflections from CSOs and other stakeholders on their future relationship.

The EU-UK Follow-up Committee was set up in March 2021 for the purpose of maintaining and strengthening relations between EU and UK CSOs, and monitoring the EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement. In addition to the economic implications, challenges regarding the implementation of the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland (Protocol) have been particularly complex and politically sensitive.

To keep abreast of developments on the ground the Committee has relied on contacts with UK-based civil society organisations and associations. For example, many of our members participated in the Committee’s fact finding mission to Belfast, Cardiff, Edinburgh and London last October.

The findings of the mission clearly demonstrate an overwhelming desire across UK CSOs for a deeper, more cooperative, constructive relationship between the UK and the EU, which would optimise the potential of the WA and TCA.

The Civil Society Alliance welcomes this valuable report and looks forward to working together to broaden our outreach to wider civil society and our social partners to achieve those aims.

See Twitter thread

Challenges facing civil society when engaging in the legislative process

A new report from the Institute for Government/Bennett Institute for Public Policy, published today, looks at the practical and procedural barriers that prevent Parliament from effectively fulfilling its constitutional role to scrutinise, amend and approve legislation. Recent trends – including the fast-tracking of legislation and increased use of secondary legislation – have led to less not more scrutiny. The report argues that Parliament needs to be empowered to be better able to challenge government bills.
Civil Society Alliance members participated in a roundtable as part of the research for the report. We explored the challenges facing civil society when engaging in the complex and inaccessible legislative process and considered ways to overcome the barriers we face.

The report’s recommendations include:

• A requirement on the government to publish all bills in draft form (with a waiver for urgent or emergency legislation) with a a ‘menu’ of options for pre-legislative scrutiny to allow flexibility within the process and prevent adding significant additional time to a bill’s timetable in all case

• Giving Commons select committees the opportunity to request pre-legislative scrutiny on any bills in their departmental remit

• Allowing select committees to request a ‘select committee’ stage on all government bills, so creating the opportunity to take evidence and set out its view on the bill.

• The House of Commons Commission should review of the resources available for members to support legislative scrutiny, including expert policy and legal resources.

• There should be a dedicated parliamentary clerk with responsibility for advising civil society and third-sector groups on procedural matters and how to engage with the legislative process and the passage of specific bills that have been announced in the King’s Speech in each session.
  

  If you want to find out more about the report’s findings and what it means for civil society, please join us at our next drop in session on Zoom on Wednesday 14 December, 2022 at 2.00 pm. To register please email info@civilsocietyalliance.uk