division_name: Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill &#8212; After Clause 16 - Environmental protection
motion: <p class="indent" pid="b31.2/3" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;reduce the level of environmental protections&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b31.2/5" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;conflict with any&#8230;international environmental agreements to which the United Kingdom is party&#8221;.</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b31.2/7" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;Worryingly, the Bill does not offer any safety net, there is no requirement to maintain existing levels of environmental protection.&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b31.2/11" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;to achieve the same or similar objectives&#8221;;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b31.2/13" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;make such alternative provision as the&#8230;national authority considers appropriate&#8221;.</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b32.0/2" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;the Department for Work and Pensions does not intend to implement the Bauer judgment through the benefits system&#8230;The Hampshire judgment is a clear example of where an EU judgment conflicts with the United Kingdom Government&#8217;s policies. Removing the effects of the judgment will help to restore the system to the way it was intended to be.&#8221;&#8211;&#8211;[Official Report, Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Public Bill Committee, <phrase class="date" code="">22 November 2022</phrase>; c. 168-69.]</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b33.0/2" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;Ministers sitting in rooms on their own, answerable to nobody, and under no requirement to explain their actions&#8221;.&#8211;&#8211;[Official Report, Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Public Bill Committee, <phrase class="date" code="">22 November 2022</phrase>; c. 126.]</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b33.0/7" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;that are redundant, rather than things that are holding us back&#8221;,</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b33.0/11" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;The retained EU law Bill became a process of retaining EU law. That is not what we wanted.&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b33.1/5" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;a document containing a proposal for those regulations has been laid before each House of Parliament&#8221;.</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b33.1/7" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;referred to, and considered by, a Committee of the House of Commons&#8221;.</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b33.1/10" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;a period of at least 30 days has elapsed after that referral&#8221;.</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b33.1/12" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;If the Committee&#8212;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b33.1/14" pwmotiontext="yes">determines that special attention should be drawn to the regulations in question, a Minister of the Crown must arrange for the instrument to be debated on the floor of each House&#8221;.</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b36.5/2" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;determines that special attention should be drawn to the regulations in question, a Minister of the Crown must arrange for the instrument to be debated on the floor of each House and voted on&#8221;.</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b40.0/2" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;Many of the laws that could be weakened using the powers contained in the Bill as currently drafted are vital to nature&#8217;s recovery. They help improve the quality of our rivers and coasts, keep dangerous chemical use at bay, and protect some of our rarest and most important habitats and species.&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b41.0/3" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;will add Section 4 rights to the dashboard as identified at least as frequently as every six months, as per the reporting requirement clause that is already in the Bill.&#8221;&#8212;[Official Report, House of Lords, <phrase class="date" code="">6 June 2023</phrase>; Vol. 830, c. 1263.]</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b43.2/4" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;largely unfettered&#8230;discretion for&#8230;substantive policy changes.&#8221;</p>