As drafted, the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill will strengthen the hand of the executive, not Parliament, because of its provisions for delegated powers and their scrutiny.
The broad scope of the delegated powers (including Henry VIII powers) within the EU (Withdrawal) Bill, the inadequate constraints placed on them, and shortcomings in the proposed parliamentary control of the delegated legislation that will be made using them, constitute a toxic mix, for Parliament and the balance of power between executive and legislature.
In a new report, ‘Taking Back Control for Brexit and Beyond: Delegated Legislation, Parliamentary Scrutiny and the EU (Withdrawal) Bill’, the Hansard Society proposes a three-part solution to the problem:
- The EU (Withdrawal) Bill should be amended to circumscribe the powers it delegates more tightly;
- A new, bespoke, EU (Withdrawal) Order strengthened scrutiny procedure should be introduced for the exercise of the widest delegated powers; and
- A new House of Commons ‘sift and scrutiny’ system – with a dedicated Delegated Legislation Scrutiny Committee – should be established for all delegated legislation.
Table of contents
- Executive summary
- The European Union (Withdrawal) Bill: delegated powers and their scrutiny
- House of Commons scrutiny of delegated legislation: an inadequate system
- A new ‘sift and scrutiny’ system for the House of Commons
- A new strengthened scrutiny procedure for the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill
- Reform of House of Lords scrutiny of delegated legislation
- Appendix: The negative and affirmative procedures under the proposed new ‘sift and scrutiny’ system in the House of Commons
Enjoy reading this? Please consider sharing it
In the run-up to the UK’s exit from the EU on 29 March 2019 we will be tracking the progress made by government and Parliament in preparing the statute book for exit day. Our analysis draws on parliamentary data and our own Statutory Instrument Tracker which we built several years ago to support our research on delegated legislation.
Attention is focused on the ‘meaningful vote’ on the UK-EU Withdrawal Agreement, but the Agreement will also be subject to a parliamentary ratification consent procedure, under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010, notable mainly for not involving a vote.
In November 2018 the House of Lords Liaison Committee published our evidence to its review of investigative and scrutiny committees. We made wide-ranging recommendations aimed at improving legislative scrutiny, facilitating more effective horizon-scanning and addressing post-Brexit scrutiny challenges.
Following the controversy surrounding the breaking of the Philip Green court injunction, has the time come for new restrictions on the use of parliamentary privilege, as previously suggested by a Joint Committee of both Houses of Parliament? Former Clerk of the Parliaments Sir David Beamish outlines the legal and procedural issues that inform the debate.
In our evidence on procedural arrangements for the ‘meaningful vote’ on the prospective UK-EU Withdrawal Agreement, we argue that the possibly unique nature and extraordinary political circumstances of the vote justify an extraordinary and imaginative remedy.