Comments | greenfieldsite: Is This a Bad Law?

greenfieldsite

Is This a Bad Law?

Feb 21, 2006 22:21

This is, at least on first reading, a worrying article about the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill.

The full bill is here. It's not actually that long and if anyone is concerned about this, I suggest they read it ( Read more... )

Comments 9

hsenag February 22 2006, 00:06:08 UTC

the debate prior to the vote is unreasonably short

How much debate do statutory instruments normally get?

The huge advantage of the current system of passing legislation is that it takes time. Multiple readings in both the Commons and the Lords, scrutiny by committee, etc. There's plenty of time for a campaign against bad or controversial legislation to grow.

This mechanism will make it all too easy to slip something through "under the radar" before the public or even MPs have realised.

Also, as David Howarth points out, presenting MPs with a "take it or leave it" option may mean that they'll accept some bad bits as a trade-off for other good bits. See for example the large amounts of "pork" in bills passed in the USA, because the President has no "line-item veto".

greenfieldsite February 22 2006, 23:57:17 UTC

Yes, I agree very much with your first point ( ... )

hsenag February 24 2006, 01:07:14 UTC

I'm not aware of any occasion where a statutory instrument has been rejected by Parliament because they didn't like part of it. I do remember that there was one a few years back which listed groups that should be considered terrorist (i.e. banned from doing stuff in the UK) and there was considerable argument about whether it was fair to include certain groups on it, but nonetheless the instrument was passed in toto.

greenfieldsite February 26 2006, 00:22:50 UTC

Could that be because statutory instruments are generally relatively uncontroversial?

The following link may also provide some reassurance:

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/L07.pdf

It seems that there are already two committees that offer some protection against your first concern that something may be slipped through "under the radar".

The Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments ("Scrutiny Committee") seeks to examine the SIs and report on any "unusual or unexpected" use of the powers or defective drafting.

There is also a Lords Committee on the Merits of Statutory Instruments. Its remit includes drawing attention to any instruments that are politically or legally important.

Both committees meet weekly.

Missing the Point anonymous February 22 2006, 07:33:36 UTC

The rate at which the government is passing legislation, means that most MPs could be completely ignorant of a huge number of bills being passed.

It also creates a situation where in order to get a parliamentary debate, we are asking backbenchers from the government's party to become rebels, just on the offchance.

We have 13 Questions to ask MPs
http://rightlinks.co.uk/linked/modules/AMS/index.php

Re: Missing the Point greenfieldsite February 22 2006, 23:34:23 UTC

Maybe the Bill could be improved by stating that just (say) one third of MPs needed to object (or sign up to a petition) in order for the draft order to be refused?

Re: Missing the Point greenfieldsite February 26 2006, 00:44:13 UTC

I'm not an MP, but I think you can find out some of the answers to your questions from reading the Bill itself.

"What guarantees are there that the Bill could not be used to bring in the EU Constitution by the back door?"

"If the Bill gives Ministers powers to charge fees by decree, is that not a charter to bring in unlimited stealth taxes?"

"What guarantees are there that the Bill could not be used to bring in ID Cards by the back door?"

There is no guarantee, but either House of Parliament can reject the order that attempts to implement this. (Possibly the House of Lords may be barred from voting on financial instruments - I haven't checked.)

"If the Bill is just a simplifying measure for deregulation, why does it contain no requirement for any orders to actually reduce the amounts of red tape and regulation?"

Maybe that is just one of its purposes? Anyway, how precisely would you define the measurement of that?

"Why does the Bill give the power to create new law, including new criminal offences, to the Law Commissions, which ( ... )

Re: Missing the Point dennyd March 4 2006, 21:38:05 UTC

Ministers aren't elected. MPs are elected, ministers are civil servants.

Thread 5