Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Regulatory Reform Committee's Books

On cover and title page: House, committees of the whole House, general committees and select committees

There has been repeated criticism in recent years from a variety of sources about both the quantity and quality of legislation. The Committee's inquiry into Ensuring standards in the quality of legislation has considered these criticisms, analysed the core problems and causes of bad quality legislation, and looked to provide solutions for both the Government and Parliament to improve the quality of legislation. The Scottish Parliament, Northern Ireland Assembly and National Assembly for Wales have adapted the Westminster model in order to improve the quality of their legislation; it is now the turn of Westminster to look at their processes and adapt them for use here. The Committee has concluded that it would be beneficial for Parliament and the Government to work together to agree standards for what makes good legislation, and as a starting point for discussion publishes a draft Code of Legislative Standards with the report. The Committee also recommends the creation of a Joint Legislative Standards Committee to provide oversight of the Cabinet's Parliamentary Business and Legislation Committee's approach to and use of the finalised Code of Legislative Standards, to ensure that the quality standards set out in the Code of Legislative Standards are met. The Committee considers that these recommendations would also improve the quality of constitutional legislation, in particular, by requiring the Government to adopt an agreed test to identify constitutional legislation and thereby improve Parliament's scrutiny of it

The Government review of public bodies focused on whether a body's functions were necessary, and if it thought they were, whether it had to be delivered at arm's length from Government. The review was poorly managed: no meaningful consultation; the tests used were not clearly defined; and no proper procedure for departments to follow. The Bill giving the power to bring about these changes was equally badly drafted. Now the Government faces the much larger challenge of successfully implementing these reforms. The Cabinet Office should issue clear guidance on how to manage this transition. The Committee has developed, with the National Audit Office, its own guidance which departments could use. The Government wanted to increase accountability by bringing functions previously discharged by public bodies back in to central departments, thus making ministers directly responsible for the decisions taken. But stakeholders and civil society play an important role providing challenge and criticism to public bodies on a day to day basis and it is easiest for them to perform this role when they have a clearly identified body to engage with, not a homogenous central department. There is a way to meet both demands: set these bodies up as executive agencies. There is a need for a simplified system for public bodies so that it is clear to everyone who is responsible for what, and how much input it is right for the Government to have. The review represents a missed opportunity to reassess what functions public bodies are needed to perform.

Special Report : Sessions 2003-04 and 2004-05, the work of the Committee, 18th report of session 2004-05, report with Evidence

Having looked at the Draft Deregulation Bill in some detail and taken evidence from a wide range of witnesses, the Committee does not think it is appropriate for Ministers to be given power to scrap legislation by order on the subjective test that it is 'no longer of practical use'. There is a risk that to give Ministers that power would undermine effective Parliamentary scrutiny. It was also felt unnecessary when the Law Commissions currently have the power to put forward outdated Bills for abolition anyway. The Law Commissions will need to make changes to their working practices in order to produce more frequent and more responsive Statute Law (Repeals) Bills. The Government should work with the Law Commissions to streamline the process for bringing forward these Bills. As for the duty on regulators to have regard to economic growth, whilst this is supported in principle, it is important that it is not used by Government to undermine the independence of regulators in the way it is implemented. It might be helpful if that provision were explicitly included in the Bill

The history of reform of the House of Lords has a long history since the Parliament Act 1911, and since the House of Lords Act 1999 removed the right of all but 92 hereditary peers to sit in the Lords, there has been a number of initiatives to further the debate on reform. The latest proposals are contained in the draft Bill (Cm. 8077, ISBN 9780101807722) published in May 2011, which was referred to the Joint Committee. In this report the Joint Committee acknowledges the controversial aspects of certain of the proposals and the members of the Committee reflect wider differences of opinion, many of the report's recommendations being decided by a majority. The majority supports the need for an electoral mandate, provided the House has commensurate powers. The current functions and role would continue, but the House would probably seek to be more assertive, to an extent that cannot be predicted. The Committee recommends a House of 450 members, 80% elected on a system of Single Transferable Voting (preferably that used in New South Wales, not the one proposed in the Bill) for a 15 year term.The main sections of the report cover: functions, role, primacy of the Commons and conventions; electoral system, size, voting system and constituencies; appointments, bishops and ministers; transition, salaries, IPSA, disqualification. The Committee recommends that, in view of the significance of the constitutional change, the Government should submit the decision to a referendum.

The Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill contains provisions to increase the scope of regulatory reform powers (following a review undertaken by the Better Regulation Task Force) in order to tackle red tape and unnecessary regulatory burdens, building on the powers of the Regulatory Reform Act 2001. The Committee examines the provisions of the Bill as brought to the Lords in May 2006 (HLB 109, session 2005-06; ISBN 0108422399) which it finds to have been changed significantly since the Bill was first introduced into the Commons in January 2006. Although the Committee finds that the Bill proposes the greatest delegation of power to Ministers that it has seen, it does not find the regulatory reform provisions inappropriate, although it questions whether the 2001 Act could not itself have been amended. The provisions relating to consolidation, simplification and implementation of Law Commission recommendations are found to be unsuitable for delivery by delegated legislation and it is suggested that primary legislation subject to special procedure would be a better option to legislate for such purposes.

Themes and trends in regulatory Reform : Ninth report of session 2008-09, Vol. 2: Oral and written Evidence

Fast-track Legislation : Constitutional implications and safeguards, 15th report of session 2008-09, Vol. 2: Evidence

The Commission's report examines the options for ensuring adequate post-legislative scrutiny of Acts of Parliament, in the light of the recommendation of the House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution (in their 14th report, HCP 173-I, session 2003-04; ISBN 0104005416). The main focus of the report is on primary legislation, but it also considers delegated legislation and European legislation. Issues discussed include: existing forms and benefits of post-legislative scrutiny in the UK Parliament and in other jurisdictions (including Canada, Australia, Germany, France and the EU); the experience of pre-legislative scrutiny; and options for post-legislative scrutiny mechanisms. A number of consultation questions are given, and responses should be received by 28th April 2006.

While it accepts that there may be a pressing need to reform non-party campaigning, the report Legislative Scrutiny: Transparency Of Lobbying, Non-party Campaigning And Trade Union Administration Bill (HL 61, HC 755) calls on the Government to pause the passage of the Transparency of Lobbying, Non-party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Bill to allow for further scrutiny and for further consultation with the Electoral Commission, the Commission on Civil Society and Democratic Engagement and relevant stakeholders. The report recommends that there be more careful consideration of the potential impact on campaigners' rights to free speech and freedom of association. The Committee welcomes the Government improvements made to Part 2 during its passage though the Commons, but suggest that concerns remain. The Joint Committee express concerns regarding: the lack of clarity about the practical effects of the provision in this Part of t

In this report the Committee describes and explains the full range of its work over the course of the 2001-2005 Parliament. The Committee distils from its experience a number of suggestions for consideration by its successor committee and recommendations addressed to the Government, in order to enhance the integration of human rights considerations into the overall policy and legislative process. Chapter 2 explains the background to the Committee's establishment. Chapter 3 covers the legislative scrutiny performed by the Committee. The monitoring of the implementation of the Human Rights Act is the subject of chapter 4, while chapter 5 covers work in relation to institutional support for human rights within the UK. The inquiries into the international treaties to which the UK is a party are dealt with in chapter 6, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights, and the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. The final chapter describes the work undertaken on monitoring action taken by the Government in response to incompatibilities with Convention rights, arising from Strasbourg judgments and declarations of incompatibility by UK courts.

Parliament and the legislative Process : 14th report of session 2003-04, Vol. 2: Evidence

17th report of Session 2005-06 : Government of Wales Bill; Childcare Bill; Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Bill (HL); Violent Crime Reduction Bill - Government response; Proposal for the Regulatory Reform (Registered Designs) Order 2006

The Public Bodies Bill (HL Bill 25, ISBN 9780108478765) proposes to create a number of delegated powers by which the Government can abolish, merge, modify the constitution, functions or budgetary arrangements or a body or authorise delegation of a body's functions to a third person or body. Several other committees have expressed concern about the extreme breadth of the delegated powers proposed, and this report outline's three significant human rights issues arising from the Bill. First is the independence and impartiality of bodies protecting and promoting human rights. The inclusion of bodies such as the Equality and Human Rights Commission, the Children's Commissioner, the Inspectorate of Prisons and the Legal Services Commission in the schedules to the Bill may undermine their functional or perceived independence. Secondly, the Committee is concerned that the abolition or reform of other bodies which serve a particular decision making function may undermine the right to procedural fairness. Thirdly, the breadth of delegation proposed in the Bill appears wholly inappropriate, and the excessive use of delegated powers may reduce the effectiveness of parliamentary scrutiny for human rights compatibility of proposed legislation.

11th report of Session 2006-07 : Building Societies (Funding) and Mutual Societies (Transfers) Bill; Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill, Government amendments: Greater London Authority Bill, Government response: Pensions Bill, regulato

work of committees In 2008-09 : Second report of session 2009-10, report, together with formal minutes and Appendices

23rd report of Session 2005-06 : Armed Forces Bill; Education and Inspections Bill; International Development (Reporting and Transparency) Bill; Government of Wales Bill - Government response; Northern Ireland (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill - Government

The draft Bill and White Paper were included in Cm. 7342-I,II,III (ISBN 9780101734226) which follows the Green paper issued in July 2007, Cm. 7170 (ISBN 9780101717021) and various other Governance of Britain papers

Incorporating HC 813-i-iv, session 2007-08

This is the 20th edition of the publication which was first published in 1862. This edition has been revised to take account of the new working practices of the House and its Committees. It contains chapters on: the House of Lords and its membership, parliamentary sessions, sittings and documents, rules of conduct and debate, divisions, public and private bills, delegated legislation, select committees, judicial business, parliamentary privilege and related matters.

House of Lords reform is a large and thorny issue on which it has proved very difficult to get political consensus. This inquiry focused on the incremental changes that could possibly be achieved outside the wider reforms that are doubtless required. Creating the power to remove Peers who have actually broken the law of the land and to remove persistent non-attendees will enjoy widespread support and would indicate that the unelected chamber was not opposed to sensible reform. Establishing a consensus about the principles that should determine the relative numerical strengths of the different party groups in the House of Lords, and for codifying such principles, is probably the most contentious of all the issues considered, but it is also the most crucial to any further progress. The Government and political parties in the Lords need to set out their positions on this matter and to engage in dialogue that will establish a consensus before the next General Election, so that both Houses can act upon an agreed reform

Proposal for a draft Marriage Act 1949 (Remedial) Order 2006 : Sixteenth report of session 2005-06, report, together with formal minutes and Appendices

On cover and title page: House, committees of the whole House, general committees and select committees. On title page: Returns to orders of the House of Commons dated 14 May 2013 (the Chairman of Ways and Means)

All-Party Parliamentary Groups (APPGs) are groups of Members, from both Houses, who may or may not be supported by outside organisations, and are established for a wide range of purposes. There is a Register of such groups, overseen by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. There has been increasing concern that APPGs pose a reputational risk to the House in several ways: they may provide access for lobbyists; they put pressure on resources; and their output is confused with that of official select committees. But APPGs also provide: forums for cross-party interaction which is not controlled by the whips, interaction between the Members of the Commons and the Lords; and a forum for parliamentarians, academics, business people, the third sector and other interested parties; time and space for policy discussion and debate; and a means for back bench parliamentarians to set the policy agenda. There is a longstanding dilemma about the regulation of APPGs: they are essentially informal groupings, established by individual Members, yet the more restrictions and requirements that are placed on them, the more they appear to be endorsed by the House. The House of Commons Commission has already decided to withdraw the passes of APPG staff. The Committee proposes a package of reforms: ensure that Members' responsibility for APPG activity is clear and accountable; ensure transparency not only about external support, but also about the activities funded by such support; and far greater clarity about the status of the various types of informal work that Members carry out.

In Transparency Of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning And Trade Union Administration Bill (HL 62), the Select Committee on the Constitution raises significant concerns about the content and handling of the Transparency of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Bill. The Bill, which regulates lobbying and sets rules on expenditure by persons or bodies other than political parties at elections, is due for its second reading in the Lords on 22 October 2013. The report says that effective parliamentary scrutiny is of manifest importance for legislation of constitutional significance. The Committee questions whether the significant lowering of the cap on expenditure at general elections by third parties is justified, given the fundamental constitutional right to freedom of political expression. There has been a lack of consultation by the Government on the proposals, including with the Electoral Commission, as well as the lack of

The Sewel Convention seeks to ensure that the UK Parliament legislates on devolved matters only with the express agreement of the Scottish Parliament, and consent is also required for legislation on reserved matters if it alters the powers of the Scottish Parliament or Scottish Ministers. Following on from a report by the Scottish Parliament Procedures Committee on the operation of the Convention (SP paper 428, 7th report, session 2 (2005) (ISBN 1406113220) published in October 2005), the Committee's report focuses on ways of improving the communications procedure between the Scottish and Westminster Parliaments, and how MPs could be better alerted that a particular Bill before Parliament had been subject to a Sewel motion in the Scottish Parliament. Recommendations made include: the introduction of a formal process whereby the Scottish Parliament notifies Westminster when a Sewel motion has been passed and the 'tagging' of all relevant public Bills; and the need for an explicit statement on explanatory notes to Bills as to which parts of the UK the provisions will affect. The report also recommends the further consideration of the need to establish a 'Super' Scottish Grand Committee, composed of Scottish MPs, MSPs and Scottish MEPs, to discuss matters of mutual interest.

This publication contains the Standing Orders of the House of Lords which set out information on the procedure and working of the House, under a range of headings including: Lords and the manner of their introduction; excepted hereditary peers; the Speaker; general observances; debates; arrangement of business; bills; divisions; committees; parliamentary papers; public petitions; privilege; making or suspending of Standing Orders.

The report of the Leader's Group examining the working practices of the House of Lords and the operation of self-regulation was published today (Tuesday 26 April). Recommendations in the report include changes to enable the Lords better to fulfil its core functions of scrutinising government, testing out and reviewing legislation, and debating important issues. The report also suggests ways in which the House of Lords could make the most of its unique strengths and resources, including its Members' skills and experience.

Work of the Committee 2008-09 : Second report of session 2009-10, report, together with formal Minutes

Book's by Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Regulatory Reform Committee

Username

Password

Password again

Birthday

Email