Great Britain: Parliament: Merits of Statutory Instruments Committee's Books

12th report of Session 2009-10 : Drawing special attention to, draft Exeter and Devon (Structural Changes) Order 2010, draft Norwich and Norfolk (Structural Changes) Order 2010, report and Evidence

management of secondary Legislation : 29th report of session 2005-06, Vol. 2: Evidence

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.

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

This report is a follow-up to the Merits of Statutory Instruments Committee 29th report, session 2005-06 (HL Paper 149-I, ISBN 9780104008409). The earlier report set out some recommendations on how the process of making secondary legislation could be improved, and this report examines that progress. Statutory Instruments (SIs), often described as secondary legislation, are the means by which government departments implement the policy measures laid down by Acts of Parliament (primary legislation). There are approximately 1200 SIs laid for parliamentary proceedings each year. The Committee believes that Government Department's still need to do more to improve the planning and quality of SIs and the policy delivered through them, such a step would help in the Committee's process of scrutiny, as well as easing the impact of such legislation on stakeholders. The Committee further invites the Government to consider the timing and cumulative impact of SIs on those regulated and that Department's should pay more attention to the strategic planning of SIs, especially those delivering a policy set by a new Act. Also the Committee states that more resources should be devoted to the consolidation and simplification of secondary legislation so that the law is clearer and more accessible. The Committee does welcome the new format of Impact Assessments (IAs) which should be provided for key measures affecting public and voluntary sectors. Every SI or its Explanatory Memorandum should clearly express its policy objective and how the success is to be measured and evaluated. Each Department is responsible for its own secondary legislation and the Committee invites each Secretary of State to ensure that senior management systematically checks the quality of such legislation.

In this consultation paper, the Law Commissions of England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are seeking views on the regulation of health care professionals in the UK and social workers in England. In their first joint consultation, the Commissions are asking how a new legal framework would: give the regulators increased flexibility in the use of their powers while ensuring public accountability; enable them to ensure proper standards of professional education, conduct and practice; and have at its heart a duty on the regulators to protect the public. It makes provisional proposals which seek to simplify and modernise the law and establish a streamlined, transparent and responsive system of regulation of health care professionals, and in England only, the regulation of social workers

Fast-track Legislation : Constitutional implications and safeguards, 15th report of session 2008-09, Vol. 1: Report

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.

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 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

Annual report For 2004 : First report of session 2004-05, report, together with appendices and formal Minutes

Incorporating HC 565-i to v, session 2003-04

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

Policing in the 21st Century : Seventh report of session 2007-08, Vol. 2: Oral and written 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.

In its Green Paper about the need for labour market reform, the European Commission argued that the increasing diversity of 21st century working relationships means that existing labour law is no longer adequate. This report brings together the evidence from a wide range f experts and representative bodies about these issues as they affect the UK labour market. It finds that the evidence does not support the Commission. The consensus is that the relatively light regulation of the UK labour market is advantageous and that problems of social disadvantage and structural unemployment are better addressed by measures aimed at tackling poor skills and social inequality rather than changing labour law. The report therefore recommends that efforts at EU level should focus on the promotion and sharing of good practice, rather than the introduction of new legislation.

In March 2005, the European Commission issued a Communication designed to improve the EU regulatory environment in order to promote competition and trade and facilitate job creation. The Committee's report examines the proposals for better regulation, including the 'regulation tools' of impact assessment, simplification and consultation, the position of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), the case for a new regulatory body to oversee regulation in the EU, the Inter-Institutional Agreement on Better Law-making and the role of Member States, the ambitions and activities of the UK presidency of the EU in this area. The Committee welcomes the initiatives and the attitudinal change that seems to be filtering through the Commission but highlights the need for full implementation and assessment; and also calls on the UK Government to ensure the issue is placed at the top of the EU political agenda.

The depth and pace of EU integration has demonstrated the need for effective democratic parliamentary scrutiny and accountability of Government at Westminster. This is the first major inquiry into the European scrutiny system in the House of Commons for eight years. There is more that the Committee could do to look at the impact of new proposals. There should be a new requirement to appoint ’Reporters' to take the lead within Committees on EU issues, as well as a more coordinated approach to the Commission Work Programme. Whilst the system need not be scrapped as some have said, it must be enhanced. Many problems arise from the fact that new Members are appointed for each document. The Committee argues forcefully for a return to the permanent membership system, new powers and a change of name to reflect the Committees' core purpose: EU Document Debate Committees. The Committee also examined how EU business is taken on the floor of the House, and the procedures which apply to it. They set out a series of recommendations about the way debates are scheduled and conducted and put the case for a new session of ’EU Questions'. They also review working practices and the visibility of the House's scrutiny of the EU in the media. It concluded that now is the time to propose the introduction of a form of national veto over EU legislative proposals, and then to explore the mechanics of disapplication of parts of existing EU obligations, notwithstanding the European Communities Act 1972

This document sets out the Government's response to the public consultation on the draft Climate Change Bill (Cm. 7040, ISBN 9780101704021) and to the reports of the following Parliamentary Committees during session 2006-07: the Joint Committee on the Draft Climate Change Bill (HLP 170-I/HCP 542-I, ISBN 9780104011379); the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee (HCP 534-I, ISBN 9780215034892); and the Environmental Audit Committee (HCP 460, ISBN 9780215035561). The Climate Change Bill seeks to introduce a clear, credible and long-term framework to support emissions reductions in the UK, designed to maximise the social and economic benefits and minimise costs, and also sets out an international precedent, reinforcing the UK's position as a consistent leader in the field of climate change and energy policy. This document explains the main changes the Government intends to make to the Bill, taking into account the consultation responses and the recommendations of the three Parliamentary Committees, and key elements of the Bill include: putting into statute the UK's domestic targets to reduce carbon dioxide emissions through domestic and international action by at least 60 per cent by 2050, and 26 to 32 per cent by 2020, against a 1990 baseline; secondary legislation to set binding limits known as carbon budgets on aggregate carbon dioxide emissions over five year periods; and the creation of a new independent body, the Committee on Climate Change, to advise on setting carbon budgets.

Incorporating HCP 166-ii,iii,iv session 2006-07

Are the Lords Listening? : Creating connections between people and Parliament, first report of session 2008-09, Vol. 2: Evidence

There has been a huge in increase in the constituency workload over the past few years adding to the pressure on Members of Parliament. Each Member has a different way of working which means in considering sitting hours there are no mainstream options which are necessarily right or wrong. The evidence suggests that the current balance of about 150 days over 34 weeks per year is broadly correct and should remain approximately as is. The Committee recommends that the House should be given the opportunity to vote on whether the House should continue to sit in September from 2013 onwards. There is widespread recognition that there is no scope for any diminution in the time available to the House for debate and scrutiny of legislation. The current pattern of 8 sitting hours on each sitting day between Monday and Thursday should therefore also continue, subject to future decisions concerning Friday sittings. Suggestions were heard that the House should sit normal working hours but that could be ill-suited to the transaction of other important Parliamentary business and needs of Members whose constituencies are some distance from Westminster. The House should be enabled to come to a decision in respect of each different day. The Committee is also currently considering whether consideration of private Members' bills should be moved from Fridays; and programming of legislation. The proposal of 'injury time' to compensate for time spent on oral statements was deemed undesirable but the Committee suggests that there should be a mechanism for backbenchers to question a Minister between 11.00 and 11.30 on Wednesdays

3rd report of Session 2005-06 : Drawing special attention to: School Governance (Contracts) (England) Regulations 2005; Waste Management Licensing (England and Wales) (Amendment and Related Provisions) (No. 2) Regulations 2005; Serious Organised Crime and

Getting Results : The Better Regulation Executive and the impact of the Regulatory Reform Agenda , fifth report of session 2007-08, Vol. 2: Oral and written Evidence

The depth and pace of EU integration has demonstrated the need for effective democratic parliamentary scrutiny and accountability of Government at Westminster. This is the first major inquiry into the European scrutiny system in the House of Commons for eight years. There is more that the Committee could do to look at the impact of new proposals. There should be a new requirement to appoint 'Reporters' to take the lead within Committees on EU issues, as well as a more coordinated approach to the Commission Work Programme. Whilst the system need not be scrapped as some have said, it must be enhanced. Many problems arise from the fact that new Members are appointed for each document. The Committee argues forcefully for a return to the permanent membership system, new powers and a change of name to reflect the Committees' core purpose: EU Document Debate Committees. The Committee also examined how EU business is taken on the floor of the House, and the procedures which apply to it. They set out a series of recommendations about the way debates are scheduled and conducted and put the case for a new session of 'EU Questions'. They also review working practices and the visibility of the House's scrutiny of the EU in the media. It concluded that now is the time to propose the introduction of a form of national veto over EU legislative proposals, and then to explore the mechanics of disapplication of parts of existing EU obligations, notwithstanding the European Communities Act 1972

Counter-terrorism policy and human Rights : Terrorism Bill and related matters, third report of session 2005-06, Vol. 2: Oral and written Evidence

Book's by Great Britain: Parliament: Merits of Statutory Instruments Committee

Username

Password

Password again

Birthday

Email