What does the decision to leave the EU mean for Parliament? What role will MPs and Peers want in relation to the exit negotiations and what will it mean for the legislative and scrutiny process?
Listen to the event in full
Clerk of the Journals, House of Commons
Seema Malhotra MP
Member for Feltham and Heston
Professor the Lord Norton of Louth
Member of the House of Lords Constitution Committee and Professor of Government and Director of the Centre for Legislative Studies, University of Hull
At this event, involving leading parliamentary and constitutional experts, we will be debating the key questions now facing Parliament over the next few years:
- What reforms – in the Chamber and Committees – might be needed to ensure the scrutiny process is fit for purpose to deal with the scale of the challenge ahead?
- Should there be a move towards greater joint working with the House of Lords? What are the pros and cons of this approach?
- Do we need a super-committee, for example modelled on the Banking Commission inquiry?
- Given the volume of legislation and regulation that will need to be sorted out, how might this be done most effectively?
- Does Parliament have sufficient capacity and expertise to support MPs and Peers and if not, what might be needed?
Enjoy reading this? Please consider sharing it
Whilst the *Miller* case may be seen as a victory for Parliament, it simultaneously highlights significant constitutional weaknesses on issues such as devolution and the role of referendums. Is it time to consider whether the UK constitution needs more legal as opposed to political regulation?
In Canada, the ‘professional politician’ remains the exception rather than the rule, and MPs with prior political experience don’t have an advantage in the development of their parliamentary careers.
If the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee published regular 'Metrics for Global Britain' it could attach clear indicators to an otherwise politicised term, enhancing the committee's scrutiny work and providing hooks for boosting its public and media profile. In evidence to the committee published in July, we explained how.
MPs are setting up the new sifting committee for delegated legislation under the EU (Withdrawal) Act, but the new procedure simply bolts a toothless sift onto the front of existing inadequate procedures.
At a time of political upheaval – with questions being asked about the leadership, policies and competence of both main UK parties – our Audit of Political Engagement reveals some interesting findings about the ways in which Conservative and Labour supporters view these factors differently and how their importance has changed over time.
As the EU (Withdrawal) Bill arrives back in the House of Commons for consideration of House of Lords amendments, this briefing paper for MPs sets out our concerns about three amendments - 110, 10 and 4 - concerning scrutiny of delegated powers and Statutory Instruments.