APPENDIX A
Consultation Procedures
Letter from the Clerk of the Committee to the
Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Proposed Regulatory Reform Order: Section 68 of
the Food Act 1984
Thank you for your letter of 21st March concerning
the above. The Deregulation and Regulatory Reform Committee considered
the matter at its meeting earlier today, and has asked me to make
the following reply.
Based on the information which you have provided,
the Committee has concluded that it would appear appropriate to
proceed with the laying of a proposal for a Regulatory Reform
Order repealing section 68 of the Food Act 1984.
The particular matter on which you have asked for
advice is that of the conduct of the consultation process required
by section 5 of the Regulatory Reform Act. Whilst it is desirable
that current Cabinet Office guidelines in respect of consultation
processes be followed (and whilst the Committee may be justified
in criticising any regulatory reform consultation process conducted
otherwise than in accordance with those guidelines), the Committee's
Standing Order requires it to consider only "whether the
proposal has been the subject of, and taken appropriate account
of, adequate consultation". Given that the current Cabinet
Office guidelines were not available at the time that the consultation
in question was carried out, the Committee will therefore consider,
as and when a proposal comes before it, whether the consultation
was adequate and appropriate in the circumstances, bearing in
mind particularly the requirements of the Regulatory Reform Act.
From the information which you have provided, it appears that
all relevant parties have been kept informed of the Government's
proposals, and have been given the opportunity to comment on those
proposals as they have developed. The Committee therefore agrees
that little purpose would be served by the carrying out, at this
stage, of a further formal consultation process.
However, there are two caveats to this response.
Firstly, it is based on the assumption that the Minister is satisfied
that he has all the information necessary to complete the statement
required by section 6 of the Regulatory Reform Act. The Committee
will not hesitate to reconsider the matter - and recommend a suitable
remedy - if it concludes, on examination of that statement, that
there is insufficient justification for any of the Minister's
conclusions.
Secondly, the Committee notes that no reference has
been made in any communication with consultees to the regulatory
reform process. As you will know, the practice is now (as it was
in respect of deregulation proposals) to include in all consultation
documents an annex referring to Parliamentary consideration of
proposals and draft orders. The Committee considers the presentation
of this information to consultees to be very important, as it
ensures that all parties are aware of their opportunity to make
their views known to the Parliamentary Committees. The Committee
therefore suggests that, when this proposal is laid before Parliament,
the Department write to all consultees informing them that they
have done so, and enclosing a suitably amended version of the
annex which is routinely included in all consultation documents.
The communication should make clear that no response to the Committees
is required, but that the opportunity to make such a response
is available should they have any further comment to make on the
Government's proposal. The Committee also suggests that the communication
should either include a copy of the section 6 statement as laid
before Parliament, or inform consultees of how copies of that
statement may be obtained.
...
30 April 2002
|
