Britain to 'adopt EU law every 12 hours' under Andy Burnham Brexit reset, peers warn

Britain will adopt new EU regulation every 12 hours under Andy Burnham's Brexit reset, a Lords' committee has warned.

The Prime Minister, after jetting off to meet Ursula von der Leyen in Dublin, will again meet with EU leaders in Brussels next week to sign his Brexit reset agreement, which he claims could raise GDP by 0.4 per cent.

But a new report from the House of Lords European Affairs Committee warns that this shift in relations would require dynamic realignment and could leave the UK swamped with new EU regulation.

A deal on farming alone could result in at least 780 pieces of in-scope EU law every year, the committee warned.

That is equivalent to two new regulations a day.

The UK, meanwhile, will be limited in its ability to influence the Brussels laws it is forced to adopt, the report noted.

It argues the Treasury has failed to take into account the cost to business of complying with the surge of new requirements.

Mr Burnham will sign a sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) deal on food and farming, an agreement on emissions trading, and a youth mobility scheme.

He will also discuss entry into the EU's electricity market, which the report warns could drive up the price of British energy bills.

Britain could also be forced to pay into a so-called "cohesion fund" to access the market, but European Relations Minister Hamish Falconer said the UK had not "accepted that principle".

Mark Francois, chairman of the European Research Group of Tory MPs, told the Daily Mail that the report revealed the true cost of a Brexit reset.

He said: "Dynamic alignment means signing up to automatically follow future EU regulations in this area, in perpetuity, regardless of the will of Parliament — and despite our country having already voted democratically to leave the EU.

"In other words, we would become a 'rule-taker' again; and all because Labour are obsessed with rejoining the EU."

And Esther McVey, the former Tory Minister, said Mr Burnham's "Brexit betrayal" would force small businesses to "follow pointless bureaucratic regulations".

LATEST POLITICS NEWS:

• Andy Burnham racks up enough taxpayer-funded flights to nearly circle globe in first 115 days
• Andy Burnham's £15billion Brexit 'surrender deal' will help just 2% of British businesses
• Andy Burnham warned NOT to rejoin EU single market by Norway's Prime Minister

She added: "I suggest Burnham starts listening to his EU constituents in Makerfield rather than just using them as a flag of convenience to fulfil his own personal ambitions."

Dynamic alignment would leave the UK automatically adopting all existing and future EU regulations. Peers fear the flood of fresh legislation could become unmanageable.

They argue Parliament would need to establish a "robust, consistent and adequately resourced cross-departmental system" just to manage Britain's new commitments to Brussels.

Lord Stirrup, chairman of the committee, said the summit would mark a "major change to the nature of the UK-EU relationship as it exists under the Trade and Cooperation Agreement".

He said: "As the UK aligns with more EU law, Parliament will face growing pressure to scrutinise significant volumes of EU legislation."

He added: "This may sound like a technical issue, but the rules in question can affect everyday matters, from food standards and consumer prices to business costs and household budgets.

"That is why effective parliamentary scrutiny is essential to ensure such changes do not pass without proper oversight."

Mr Burnham has fought back against critics of his Brexit reset, insisting the result could be "more like the Brexit that people thought they were voting for in 2016".

Lord Cameron, the former Conservative Prime Minister and arch-remainer, urged the Prime Minister not to reignite the Brexit debate.

He argued Britain's economic problems had "nothing to do with Brexit".

Mr Burnham, speaking to reporters at the European Political Community Summit, said he was wrong, and that his intervention was "more about unity and the Conservative Party than it is about fighting for British interests".