The Scottish and Welsh governments have today jointly published amendments to the EU Withdrawal Bill to prevent the UK Government taking control of devolved policy areas, such as agriculture.
First Ministers Nicola Sturgeon and Carwyn Jones have written to Prime Minister Theresa May saying the amendments are necessary to respect the "hard-won" devolution settlements.
Both governments have said they could not recommend giving consent to the withdrawal bill unless it is substantially changed.
The amendments are hoped to ensure devolved policy areas come back to the Scottish Parliament and National Assembly of Wales on withdrawal from the EU.
Both First Ministers of Scotland and Wales have described the bill as a "naked power grab".
Indeed, the rural economy has expressed its fear over these very disagreements.
The chief executive of the Tenant Farmers' Association (TFA) aired his concern that disagreements between Westminster and the devolved governments of the UK could impede a post-Brexit agreement for agriculture.
Four different ways
However, the UK Government's First Secretary of State Damian Green said the Government will need to maintain a common UK approach on some issues, as well as those areas where it will make sense to transfer powers direct to the devolved governments.
He said: "Doing things four different ways - in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland - will not be the best way if it adds costs to companies and customers across the UK."
Mr Green's comments come as news that a think-tank has claimed that a "core UK policy" is the best way forward when deciding how to deliver farm subsidies post-Brexit.
But the Minister for UK Negotiations on Scotland’s Place in Europe, Michael Russell, said Westminster cannot "drive a coach and horses" through the devolution settlement.
“At present that is what the EU (Withdrawal) Bill does. The UK Government will take control of all policy areas exercised at EU level, whether they are devolved or not.
“That is why the First Ministers of Scotland and Wales have described this bill as a naked power grab.
“We have made it repeatedly clear that we are not opposed in principle to UK-wide arrangements, but devolved policy areas must come back to the Scottish Parliament, where they properly lie, and then we can work towards an agreement.”
UK-wide policies
Below are some illustrative examples of where a common approach across the UK could help companies and customers across the UK.
In terms of food labelling, foods placed on the market across the EU have common labelling requirements that are set by harmonised EU legislation.
If the UK doesn’t agree to continue a common approach to labelling, different requirements could spring up in the different countries of the UK.
This could mean a jam producer wanting to sell their product in Dundee and in Bristol would have to comply with two different labelling requirements - increasing production costs and discouraging cross-border trading.
Divergent food labelling requirements could also make it more difficult to enter into trade deals.
In terms of animal health, EU law creates an alert system when infectious diseases like Foot and Mouth Disease break out, as well as wider disease prevention and control measures.
This is another good example of where common working practices will be needed for safety reasons, and where the UK will need to work together to ensure that differing (lower) standards in one part of Great Britain don’t put another part at risk.
Consistency will also be necessary for commercial reasons - to ensure that the UK are able to broker and maintain trade deals and ensure that farmers in Scotland can sell their livestock in England and Wales.
