Greater parliamentary scrutiny
15. While the RRO process has a special role to play
in reducing unnecessary regulatory burdens and realising the potential
benefits, effective parliamentary scrutiny of the Government's
proposals should not be sacrificed. At times, the RRO process
has been simultaneously criticised for providing scrutiny of Government
proposals that is both inadequate and excessive. For example,
it is useful to contrast the Government's comments with the criticisms
made of the RRO process by Nicky Padfield in the context of the
proposal for the Regulatory Reform (Prison Officers) (Industrial
Action) Order when she criticised the wide powers available under
the Regulatory Reform Act.[28]
We recognise that the RRO process provides the Executive with
an alternative procedure for amending primary legislation and
may be perceived by some commentators as something of a constitutional
oddity. In our view, some anxiety about the RRO process is likely
to be derived from the misconception that the RRO process automatically
provides less detailed scrutiny than that available during the
normal scrutiny of a Bill. In reality, individual clauses within
a Bill may be subjected to far less scrutiny compared with that
available under the RRO process. We recognise that our prime task
is to provide rigorous scrutiny of Government proposals for the
amendment of primary legislation by RRO. We believe that we achieve
this degree of scrutiny without imposing unnecessary delays and
we are prepared to consider suggestions for improving the process,
provided these do not compromise our prime task.
26 
