The position is symmetrical because the statutory veto relates to the powers in the Bill, which is the point made by my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Cabinet Office in her intervention on the Chairman of the Procedure Committee. We were asked to introduce a statutory veto, but we were also asked to narrow the powers in the Bill. The Government amendments include a statutory veto, which relates to the narrowing of the powers in the Bill that the House agreed yesterday.
In the context of amendments to focus the order-making power more explicitly on better regulation objectives, it was considered appropriate for the veto to provide a symmetrical and focused check on that power. The Government consider it right that proposals are judged on the extent to which they deliver the regulatory reform agenda, and it is right that the proposals are judged on whether the conditions in the Bill are met.
First and foremost, the veto is intended to present an effective and workable mechanism to protect against the abuse of the order-making power in the Bill. To that end, the veto builds directly upon the strengths of the existing system for scrutinising orders. The conditions to which the veto is tied are consistent with those contained in the Standing Orders of relevant Committees under the 2001 Act, conditions against which Committees have previously tested and, in one case, rejected regulatory reform orders. The Government believe that those conditions continue to represent key indicators on whether a proposal is suitable for delivery by order.
Additionally, the veto addresses concerns surrounding a Minister’s capacity to implement Law Commission recommendations ““with changes””, which has raised questions about the extent to which a recommendation can legitimately be altered when it is delivered by order. In a case in which a Committee judges a recommendation to have been changed to such a degree that the recommendation can no longer be seen to implement a recommendation of the Law Commission, the Committee can exercise the statutory veto. As has been noted, however, the Government acknowledge the need for continued discussion about the most appropriate way in which to take forward the provision of a veto for Committees, which is a delicate issue. As was said yesterday, one of the reasons why the Bill is delicate is that it touches not only on what the Executive may want to, but on the relationship between the Executive and Parliament, which is why we are open to continued discussion on those matters.
Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Pat McFadden
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 16 May 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
446 c924-5 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:35:30 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_324170
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_324170
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_324170