What amendments are needed to the sanctions powers in the Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill being considered by Parliament?

Publications / Briefings

The Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill: four delegated powers that should be amended to improve future accountability to Parliament

3 Mar 2022

The Bill seeks to crack down on ‘dirty money’ and corrupt elites in the UK and is being expedited through Parliament following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. This briefing identifies four delegated powers in the Bill that should be amended to ensure future accountability to Parliament.

Download the briefing

,
Researcher, Hansard Society

Get our latest research, insights and events delivered to your inbox

Share this and support our work

The scope and design of the delegation of power sought in any Bill raise important questions for MPs that go to the heart of their role as legislators. MPs should be clear about the level of authority they are delegating to government Ministers and be confident that they will not regret forgoing their ability to fully scrutinise future government decisions.

Our analysis of delegated powers in this and other Bills draws heavily on ‘legislative standards’ which we have derived from reports of the House of Lords Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee (DPRRC). The DPRRC is an influential committee and provides the nearest thing to a form of ‘jurisprudence’ (or ‘legisprudence’) in the area of delegated powers.

The Bill falls into three Parts:

Part 1 of the Bill makes provisions to set up a register of overseas entities and their beneficial owners, and requires overseas entities who own land in the UK to register in certain circumstances. The purpose behind these provisions is to combat economic crime, by requiring anonymous foreign owners of UK property to reveal their real identities to ensure criminals cannot hide behind chains of shell companies. We have identified at least 23 provisions that confer new delegated powers (not including the powers to make commencement, transitional and saving provisions). Of these, seven include powers that can be exercised to amend primary legislation (‘Henry VIII powers’).

Part 2 of the Bill makes provisions to reform Unexplained Wealth Orders by amending the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.

Part 3 of the Bill makes provisions about breaches of financial sanctions by amending the Policing and Crime Act 2017. These Parts contain no provisions that confer new delegated powers.

There are four clauses of concern

Clause 14: Sections 12 and 13: supplementary
Clause 17: Power to modify application process etc in certain cases
Clause 23: Disclosure of protected information
Clause 38: Financial penalties

The exercise of the powers in the first three clauses is subject to the ‘negative’ parliamentary scrutiny procedure. In all three cases we recommend that parliamentarians should seek to amend the clauses so that the higher ‘affirmative’ scrutiny procedure applies. The briefing provides a suggested amendment to achieve this in each case.

The fourth and final clause of concern relates to the imposition of a financial penalty. Where the penalty for an offence may be set by delegated legislation, the maximum penalty that can be imposed should be set out on the face of the Bill. The Bill does not do this, so the briefing provides a suggested amendment to achieve this objective.

Cite this

Vangimalla, D. (2022) The Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill: Delegated Powers (London: Hansard Society)

Who funds this work?

This work is supported by the Legal Education Foundation as part of the Hansard Society's Delegated Legislation Review.

Latest / Highlights

News / Parliament gagged by super-injunction? A conversation with Joshua Rozenberg - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 101

Legal expert Joshua Rozenberg joins us this week to unpack the legal and constitutional ramifications of one of the most troubling intersections of government secrecy, national security, and parliamentary accountability in recent memory. Thousands of Afghans who had worked with British forces were placed at risk of Taliban revenge attacks after a catastrophic government data leak in 2022 exposed their details. In response, ministers secured a “super-injunction” – so secret that even its existence could not be reported – effectively silencing public debate and preventing parliamentary scrutiny for almost two years. The breach, only revealed this week, led to a covert resettlement scheme which has already cost taxpayers millions of pounds. Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

News / One year on: How is Parliament performing? - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 100

In our 100th episode, we take stock of Parliament one year after the 2024 general election. With a fractured opposition, a dominant Labour government, and a House of Commons still governed by rules designed for a two-party system, how well is this new Parliament really functioning? Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

News / Labour's welfare meltdown - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 99

It’s been a bruising week for the Government, as a Labour backbench revolt forced ministers to gut their own welfare reforms live in the House of Commons. We explore why Sir Keir Starmer appears to have such a poor grip on parliamentary management. Plus, House of Lords reform expert Professor Meg Russell explains why the hereditary peers bill may be a once-in-a-generation chance to tackle deeper issues — like curbing prime ministerial patronage and reducing the bloated size of the upper chamber. And in Dorking, faith and politics collide over assisted dying. Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

News / What Westminster gets wrong about the NHS - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 98

We are joined this week by two guests who bring invaluable insight into the intersection of health policy and parliamentary life. Dr. Sarah Wollaston and Steve Brine – both former MPs, health policy experts, and co-hosts of the podcast Prevention is the New Cure – share their experiences of how the House of Commons handles health and social care. Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

Submissions / Parliamentary scrutiny of treaties - Our evidence to the House of Lords International Agreements Committee

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.