Labour’s recent decision to dismantle the European Scrutiny Committee has been described by Suella Braverman as marking the “beginning of the end” of Brexit.

Established in 1973, the committee played a pivotal role in scrutinizing the UK government’s dealings with the EU.

Commons leader Lucy Powell’s announcement to abolish this committee forms part of a broader reform of MP select committees.

Select committees are essential to the UK parliamentary system, comprised of small groups of MPs or members of the House of Lords tasked with delving into specific issues or policies.

The disbanding of the European Scrutiny Committee, which has been instrumental in overseeing EU-related matters, has provoked significant backlash from various political quarters.

Former Home Secretary Suella Braverman took to social media to voice her disapproval, branding the decision as “anti-democratic, lacking transparency, and a disservice to the millions of British people who voted to deliver Brexit in 2016 and 2019.” Braverman further emphasized, “This is the beginning of the end of Brexit.”

Her sentiments were echoed by Sir Bill Cash, who chaired the committee for fourteen years.

Cash condemned the move as a “breach of Parliamentary sovereignty,” criticizing the manner in which legislation rescinding standing order 143 — defining the committee’s scope and responsibilities — was introduced without an MPs’ vote.

The European Movement, a pro-EU organization, also expressed discontent, albeit for different reasons.

United on Scrutiny Committee’s Abolition

Dr. Mike Galsworthy, chair of the campaign group, remarked, “Pro-Europeans are in staunch agreement with Brexiteers on this one – scrapping the European Scrutiny Committee is a huge disservice to our parliament and public.”

Galsworthy highlighted the importance of the committee in scrutinizing new EU legislation and assessing opportunities for cooperation that might be overlooked without such a forum.

“Given that there are new ministers with portfolio responsibilities on Europe, who is going to hold them to account in parliament?” Galsworthy questioned.

He stressed that the committee could have facilitated discussions on alignment with new EU legislation and emerging cooperation areas.

“All of that discussion has had its natural forum ripped away. I’m delighted that Brexiteers and pro-Europeans agree on this and urge the government to reinstate or replace it with a new forum for that critical renewed function.”
Dr. Mike Galsworthy

This controversy unfolds as the Labour Party seeks to “reset” its relationship with the EU, aiming to strengthen ties in trade, security, and foreign policy.

The Prime Minister pledged to repair Britain’s strained relations with the EU for the benefit of “generations to come.”

The government faces additional calls to pursue a youth mobility scheme with the EU, complementing the “new approach” to legal migration introduced by Yvette Cooper.

In a critique of the previous Conservative government’s policies, Cooper highlighted rising legal migration levels as indicative of a “failure over many years to tackle skills shortages and other problems in the UK labor market.”

“This is why we are setting out a different approach – one that links migration policy and visa controls to skills and labor market policies – so immigration is not used as an alternative to training or tackling workforce problems here at home.”
Yvette Cooper

Dr. Galsworthy reiterated the necessity of better training for British citizens to fill workforce gaps but cautioned against penalizing the youth and other critical sectors.

“This should not be used as a reason to penalize our own youth, universities, NHS, hospitality and small businesses — many which badly need opportunities opened right now.”
Dr. Mike Galsworthy

As such, the decision to abolish the European Scrutiny Committee remains a contentious topic, uniting both pro-EU advocates and Brexiteers in their call for greater parliamentary oversight and accountability.