Adequacy of the explanatory statement
32. Before we move on to our assessment of the
proposal against the Standing Order criteria, we have the following
comments to make concerning the adequacy of the explanatory statement
which accompanied this proposal. The Department's explanation
of the way this proposed order would work, its consideration of
the statutory tests, and its assessment of the implications of
the proposed order was deficient to an unacceptable extent. When
a proposal for a regulatory reform order is laid before Parliament,
there will almost always be some points which require clarification
before we are able to complete our consideration and report to
the House. We do not consider it acceptable, however, to be obliged
to ask twenty-one separate questions about a proposal which is
not, in fact, of any very great complexity.[23]
The inadequacy of the explanatory statement was a major factor
in our decision to call for oral evidence from the Minister.
33. It is our duty to ensure that proposals for
regulatory reform orders receive the degree of scrutiny appropriate
to proposals to make changes to primary legislation. For this
to be possible, the explanatory statement must provide an analysis
which clearly explains the effect of the proposed order and specifically
addresses the requirements of section 6(2) of the Regulatory Reform
Act. We therefore expect departments to be far more rigorous in
the explanatory statements accompanying future proposals for regulatory
reform orders than has been the case in this instance.
17 
