Northern Ireland After Brexit (Northern Ireland Scrutiny Committee Report)

Baroness Ludford Excerpts

Wednesday 25th March 2026 Grand Committee

[Baroness Ludford (LD)]

My Lords, I am grateful to take part in this debate, although I was not a member of the committee until January, so did not have the advantage of taking part in the drawing up of this report, which, as our chairman noted, was agreed unanimously. I share in the tributes to our staff, our chair and the other members. As not only a new girl on the committee but one who does not come from Northern Ireland, I am confining myself, certainly in my early days, to comments that are mainly, I hope, relatively non-controversial and constructive.

Of course, as committee members, our views on Brexit and its aftermath differ. Mine have been expressed vocally over the past decade, but I will not be tempted to repeat them here, despite the naughty example of the noble Lord, Lord Hain, and the noble Baroness, Lady Ritchie, let alone the noble Lords, Lord Redwood and Lord Lilley. I will focus on how I can contribute to understanding and trying to resolve the practical challenges and difficulties for businesses, other organisations and consumers in Northern Ireland. The noble Baronesses, Lady Foster, Lady Goudie and Lady Ritchie, described those practical problems so well, as did the noble Lord, Lord Elliott, who highlighted farmers in particular.

The noble Baroness, Lady Foster, had a point when she said that she thought there is a culture of denial about the existence and extent of some of these problems. I was struck by a comment, reflected in the report, from Ian Jeffers, CEO of the charity Co-operation Ireland—of which the noble Baroness is, I understand, a board member. He said that the Windsor Framework

“is to some extent opening up old wounds, or reminding us of some of the things from the past … We are in some ways isolating, as a result of the framework and Brexit, the largely Protestant, unionist, loyalist community. The feedback that I am getting from community groups that we work with in the PUL … community is a feeling of loss”.

That is something I note for my own awareness and understanding, not to either endorse or contest it or, of course, to exclude other views.

I admit that some things have surprised me, not least how long it seems to be taking to set up promised structures since the TCA and the Northern Ireland protocol six years ago, and the Windsor Framework three years ago, though I acknowledge that, for part of that time, there was no Northern Ireland Assembly or Executive. I was also surprised to learn that the First Minister declined to engage with our committee and, since she does so decline, that also bars the Deputy First Minister from engaging with us. I will no doubt be reproached for being either ignorant or naive—I am probably both—but, since there was a Sinn Féin member on the delegation from the Irish Parliament that recently visited and met our committee, I would have hoped for more flexibility in attitudes.

On the information and support services for businesses, there is frustration about delay. We learn from the Government’s response that the promised and much-needed one-stop shop requested by the excellent review from the noble Lord, Lord Murphy, which is designed to answer queries and assist businesses, gets its £16 million funding only in the next financial year, 2026-27. It will presumably be at least 2027-28 before that is up and running. Others, such as the noble Baronesses, Lady Sanderson and Lady Foster, have talked about the one-stop shop, so all I add is that our witnesses stressed, for both the trader support service and the one-stop shop, the need to avoid total reliance on AI and chatbots and to provide what is becoming a vital but vanishing resource in customer service, which is human beings to talk to with specific queries.

I turn to divergence between UK and EU law, and hence between applicable laws in GB and NI. The committee stressed the need for legal clarity on regulatory divergence for Northern Ireland businesses and those in GB. It pointed out:

“The former Windsor Framework Sub-Committee”,


whose chair the noble Lord, Lord Jay of Ewelme, helpfully contributed to this debate,

“repeatedly argued (and recommended) that the Government should take responsibility for monitoring regulatory divergence both within the UK (GB/NI) and between the UK and the EU, and place that information in the public domain”.

The report we are debating insisted:

“This should take the form of a database of EU law which applies in Northern Ireland … This is vital if the public and businesses are to understand the regulatory landscape and the laws which apply to them in Northern Ireland. We recommend that this work be the responsibility of a new unit”,


or office, which might sensibly be located

“in the Cabinet Office responsible for regulatory divergence”.

Such a call predates the UK-EU reset, but surely acquires even more urgency and scope with it.

Dr Lisa Claire Whitten, research fellow at Queen’s University Belfast School of Law, told the committee that for

“policy-makers and stakeholders seeking to understand which laws currently apply to Northern Ireland under the Windsor Framework there is no authoritative, agreed and updated source available”.

That is a pretty shocking state of affairs. Unfortunately, the Government’s response to the report says

“we would not be pursuing a specific UK-developed database of EU rules as we do not believe this would deliver the same value that a significantly enhanced support offer for SMEs could from the funding available”.

I contend that this is to misunderstand; it is comparing apples and pears. Traders need both a database of laws and a centre staffed by people who can answer specific queries. They are not alternatives to be set against one another.

The reset that the Government are pursuing in the relations of the whole of the UK with the EU, which I thoroughly welcome, could help reduce divergence between GB and Northern Ireland, as has been said by others, particularly with an SPS agreement. Perhaps it could even remove the infamous “not for EU” labelling. Crucially, however, it will not cover the customs obligations which weigh so heavily on GB-Northern Ireland trade.

It will be interesting to see whether the reset influences the Government’s thinking and action on engagement and consultation, on how to make information on applicable legislation transparently available and on capacity for monitoring and scrutiny, not least in this Parliament. At present, only our Northern Ireland Committee does this monitoring job in Westminster, so will the Government encourage the reincarnation of a European affairs or scrutiny committee in the other place?

The committee rightly wondered

“whether the commitments made at the UK-EU summit regarding ‘decision-shaping’ deliver opportunities for the UK to engage effectively at the pre-legislative stage”.

Whatever one’s scepticism about “decision-shaping”, of course any opportunities that might arise can be exploited only if businesses and others actually know what is coming up so they can engage with the Government and the European Commission. Awareness needs to be followed by transparency of work and ease of access. SDLP MLA Matthew O’Toole remarked that some of the UK-EU structures, such as the Joint Committee, Specialised Committee and Joint Consultative Working Group—I have already mentioned three committees—

“are a little opaque and convoluted”.

DUP MP Gavin Robinson noted of bodies such as the Joint Committee and the JCWG—I am sorry, I have lapsed into acronyms—

“you will not find an address, contact point, published minutes or an agenda for those. In the specialist groups, you might find a published minute, and it will be so high level and repetitive it is thoroughly useless”.

Oh dear, that is a harsh judgment—but probably true. It is obviously not good enough and hardly helps reconcile people to the structures and processes of the Windsor Framework.

The committee explains that it sees its task as

“not to argue for or against the Windsor Framework itself, but rather to scrutinise its operation in an objective and evidence-based manner”.

I will try to take my inspiration from that. However, I can say, not least as I did not take part in drawing up this report, that I believe it has done a very valuable job, including in highlighting how the aspirations of transparency, participation, engagement and dialogue are being met only patchily in the operation of the framework, and that improving that record is essential for business, the whole community and the economy in Northern Ireland, as well as GB as a whole.

The experience of Northern Ireland will be either a beacon or a lesson for the whole UK as the reset proceeds, so a lot depends on getting things right in the operation of the Windsor Framework. Unfortunately, we will all then be in the fax democracy, not just Northern Ireland, and we must at least be informed in a transparent manner. The noble Lord, Lord Murphy, commented in his review that the Government should not only be transparent about the functioning of the Stormont brake and applicability Motion, but

“should also go further to acknowledge the impact EU legislation is having on Northern Ireland, and where it has acted to address those concerns”.

This seems to me not only to be very wide advice but to have wider relevance to the process of reset. Otherwise, we are going to lose the support of people. The fact that the Windsor Framework arrangements can be described to the committee as being of “labyrinthine complexity” and “extraordinary complexity” is not only a poor service to the people of Northern Ireland, to put it mildly, but a poor omen for reception of the output from the reset.

I conclude by saying that the Government therefore need not only to try to implement a Rolls-Royce information system for Northern Ireland but to be ready for the demands of dynamic alignment with EU law for the whole UK. We might not get a say or a voice, which of course would be my solution, but we need at least to know what it is all about.

--- Later in debate ---

[Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent]

I have not had sight of that question and, apparently, neither has the person who gave me the answer. But online retailers continue to operate in Northern Ireland. As in the rest of the UK, prices between online retailers may vary. We recommend pet owners and others do their research to see which retailer best meets their supply.

The noble Baroness, Lady Foster, and my noble friend Lady Ritchie, as well as the noble Lord, Lord Caine, rightly raised the issue of haulage, logistics and the trusted haulier scheme. We have accepted the recommendations of my noble friend Lord Murphy, in this area and are looking at all possibilities to reduce frictions for logistics and haulage businesses on an ongoing basis. In parallel, we will continue to monitor the effectiveness of the available facilitations. The Government have also established a new Northern Ireland business stakeholders’ group as a formal means of engagement between the Government and Northern Ireland business organisations. This group includes representations from key sectors, including the Road Haulage Association, and provides a direct channel for input into technical UK-EU fora.

The noble Lord, Lord Elliott, raised the issue of animal and livestock movement. He will also be aware that I have met the Ulster Farmers’ Union and some young farmers, and this issue has been raised. The noble Lord will be aware that the best way in which to manage this will be through an SPS agreement and that is why we are seeking to move quickly to deliver on this issue, but I have heard both him and the representations made by others.

The noble Lord, Lord Jay, who previously chaired the committee, as well as the noble Baroness, Lady Ludford, and noble Lord, Lord Rogan, touched, as did other Lords, on the record of regulatory divergence. The Government’s priority is to deliver the enhanced regulatory one-stop shop to advise and support businesses in trading across the whole UK market. We believe that this one-stop shop is far better placed to support small businesses that face challenges. We will seek for this one-stop shop to provide regulatory alerts to businesses on changes to the rules, which we would expect to be accessible to them. The Windsor Framework and a set of online tools provided by the EU can already be used to find regulations of relevance to Northern Ireland. It is for these reasons that our response to the independent review of the Windsor Framework set out that a one-stop shop would be our focus going forward.

[Baroness Ludford (LD)]

I apologise for interrupting the Minister again. I am a bit like a dog with a bone on this question of a database, because I am still not entirely clear that a one-stop shop answering specific queries is the same thing as a comprehensive database of all applicable laws being kept up to date, which is not static but dynamic. They are two different things, and I am not reassured by the Minister. I am sure that she responds in good faith, but I tried to suggest in my remarks that the two were conflated. I am not sure that her earlier answer to the noble Lord, Lord Carlile, fully removes my doubts on the subject.

[Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent (Lab)]

The Government have made a decision that we will focus on helping people work with it, rather than keeping a list, so that we can make sure that people have the support they need as they try to navigate the impact on their businesses and on their trade.