英国脱欧后苏格兰和威尔士的监管

IF 2.1 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
M. Keating
{"title":"英国脱欧后苏格兰和威尔士的监管","authors":"M. Keating","doi":"10.1080/21582041.2023.2197881","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT While the United Kingdom was a member of the EU, a number of regulatory competences were shared between the EU and devolved authorities in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. As Northern Ireland is governed by the Protocol, which requires dynamic alignment with most EU regulations, it is a case apart and this article deals only with Scotland and Wales. Where repatriated competences should go after Brexit has been a matter of political contention. Attempts to centralise at the UK level have been rebuffed so far but tensions remain. Common Frameworks are designed to deal with shared competencies but are inconsistent and work best with technical matters. UK measures regarding the application of international trade agreements, the EU Internal Market Act, legislation on subsidy control and professional qualifications undermine the regulatory autonomy of Scotland and Wales. The real test will come if the UK diverges radically from EU regulations while the devolved governments resist.","PeriodicalId":46484,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Social Science","volume":"18 1","pages":"185 - 196"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Regulation in Scotland and Wales after Brexit\",\"authors\":\"M. Keating\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/21582041.2023.2197881\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT While the United Kingdom was a member of the EU, a number of regulatory competences were shared between the EU and devolved authorities in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. As Northern Ireland is governed by the Protocol, which requires dynamic alignment with most EU regulations, it is a case apart and this article deals only with Scotland and Wales. Where repatriated competences should go after Brexit has been a matter of political contention. Attempts to centralise at the UK level have been rebuffed so far but tensions remain. Common Frameworks are designed to deal with shared competencies but are inconsistent and work best with technical matters. UK measures regarding the application of international trade agreements, the EU Internal Market Act, legislation on subsidy control and professional qualifications undermine the regulatory autonomy of Scotland and Wales. The real test will come if the UK diverges radically from EU regulations while the devolved governments resist.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46484,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contemporary Social Science\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"185 - 196\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contemporary Social Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/21582041.2023.2197881\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Social Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21582041.2023.2197881","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

当英国是欧盟成员国时,欧盟与苏格兰、威尔士和北爱尔兰的权力下放机构共享了许多监管权限。由于北爱尔兰受该议定书管辖,该议定书要求与大多数欧盟法规动态保持一致,因此这是一个单独的案例,本文仅涉及苏格兰和威尔士。在英国退欧后,回流的能力应该流向何处一直是政治争论的问题。到目前为止,在英国层面进行中央集权的尝试遭到了拒绝,但紧张局势依然存在。通用框架旨在处理共享的能力,但不一致,最适合技术问题。英国在实施国际贸易协定、《欧盟内部市场法》、补贴控制立法和专业资格方面的措施削弱了苏格兰和威尔士的监管自主权。如果英国彻底背离欧盟的监管规定,而权力下放的政府却予以抵制,真正的考验将会到来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Regulation in Scotland and Wales after Brexit
ABSTRACT While the United Kingdom was a member of the EU, a number of regulatory competences were shared between the EU and devolved authorities in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. As Northern Ireland is governed by the Protocol, which requires dynamic alignment with most EU regulations, it is a case apart and this article deals only with Scotland and Wales. Where repatriated competences should go after Brexit has been a matter of political contention. Attempts to centralise at the UK level have been rebuffed so far but tensions remain. Common Frameworks are designed to deal with shared competencies but are inconsistent and work best with technical matters. UK measures regarding the application of international trade agreements, the EU Internal Market Act, legislation on subsidy control and professional qualifications undermine the regulatory autonomy of Scotland and Wales. The real test will come if the UK diverges radically from EU regulations while the devolved governments resist.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Contemporary Social Science
Contemporary Social Science SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
8.30%
发文量
15
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信