In this webinar, leading parliamentary and legal experts unpicked the detail surrounding the delegated powers and scrutiny procedures laid out in the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill, and explained what it all means for Parliament.
[CLOSED] 12:30pm, 12 October 2022 Online (webinar)
Read our briefing, Five problems with the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill
The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill, which was introduced to Parliament on 22 September 2022, is a key plank of the Government's post-Brexit agenda and affects vast swathes of the statute book, as well as the relationship between Government and Parliament.
The Bill offers broad new powers to Ministers, including the ability to revoke and replace Retained EU Law (REUL) with 'alternative provision' they consider 'appropriate'. It reduces parliamentary oversight in some areas by expanding the scope of existing powers, while also providing for enhanced parliamentary scrutiny procedures in others.
In this webinar, leading parliamentary and legal experts unpicked the detail surrounding the Bill's delegated powers and explained what it all means for Parliament and the scrutiny of regulations.
Lord Anderson of Ipswich KBE KC / @bricksilk Cross-bench Peer and barrister
Sir Jonathan Jones KC / @SirJJKC Senior Consultant, Linklaters, and former Head of the Government Legal Department
Dr Ruth Fox / @RuthFox01 Director, Hansard Society
Chair: Dr Brigid Fowler / @Brigid_Fowler Senior Researcher, Hansard Society
This work is supported by the Legal Education Foundation as part of the Hansard Society's Delegated Legislation Review.
The UK Spending Review outlines how Government funds will be allocated over several years. Unlike the Budget, which raises revenue, the Review decides how it is spent. But how is it approved? What role does Parliament play if it doesn’t vote on the Review itself? This blog explores how the Spending Review works, how it differs from the Budget, and how Parliament holds the Government to account through the Estimates process.
On Friday 13 June, the House of Commons will once again debate the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which would legalise assisted dying in England and Wales. Specifically, it will hold a second day of Report Stage, during which the whole House will debate and vote on amendments. This briefing explains the structure of Report Stage, what happened on the first day of Report Stage, how amendments are selected and grouped, on which amendments a decision can still be taken, and the likely sequence of events this Friday, including whether a final vote will take place.
The Chancellor, Rachel Reeves MP, will deliver a statement on the Spending Review. MPs will resume Report Stage of the assisted dying bill and debate key legislation on football governance, mental health, and planning and infrastructure. Peers and MPs are expected to resolve their standoff over AI and copyright in the Data (Use and Access) Bill. The Commons Defence Committee will hear from the lead reviewers of the Strategic Defence Review, while a Lords Committee will examine the Chagos Archipelago sovereignty issue. The Hansard Society’s Director will give evidence to the Modernisation Committee about access to the House of Commons and its procedures.
In this episode, we explore why ministers keep bypassing Parliament to make major announcements to the media — and whether returning to the Despatch Box might help clarify their message. We unpack the Lords' uphill battle to protect creators’ rights in the Data Use and Access Bill, challenge claims that the Assisted Dying Bill lacks scrutiny, and examine early findings from a Speaker’s Conference on improving security for MPs, as threats and intimidation against politicians continue to rise. Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.
Our evidence on treaty scrutiny has been published by the House of Lords International Agreements Committee. Our submission outlines the problems with the existing framework for treaty scrutiny and why legislative and cultural change are needed to improve Parliament's scrutiny role. Our evidence joins calls for a parliamentary consent vote for the most significant agreements, a stronger role for Parliament in shaping negotiating mandates and monitoring progress, and a sifting committee tasked with determining which agreements warrant the greatest scrutiny.
