| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
5.45 pm
Mr. Chope: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I seek your advice. In Committee, the then Minister—now the Minister for Employment and Welfare Reform, the hon. Member for East Renfrewshire (Mr. Murphy)—gave an undertaking, at column 254, that he would produce a draft of the code of practice referred to in what is now clause 21, in good time for the Report stage so that Members would have a chance to look at it. We shall discuss clause 21 later this afternoon, and I wonder what can be done to ensure that the draft code of conduct is produced. It is still not forthcoming. Surely in such circumstances it would be appropriate for these proceedings to be adjourned pending the production of the draft document.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The hon. Gentleman’s point is really a matter for debate, and the issue will no doubt come out as we proceed this afternoon. Ministers will answer for themselves the points that he has raised.
Mr. Chope: Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. You rightly say that this is a matter for debate, but my concern is that, just as the Government talked out the last group of amendments last night, it might be their intention to talk out the amendments to part 2 this afternoon. We would not therefore even have the chance to debate the matter that I have raised.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The hon. Gentleman is bearing out the point that I have just made. These issues are very much matters for debate, and they will come out in the debate.
‘(1) Where within the period set out in section 13 either House of Parliament resolves that the content of an order is inappropriate for provision to be made under section [Power to remove or reduce burdens] , there shall be no further proceedings in respect thereof.
(2) An order which has the same or similar effect to one that has previously been prevented from passing under the provisions of subsection (1) may not be laid under Part 1 within the subsequent two-year period.
(3) In this section, “two year period” means the period of two years beginning with the day on which the draft order was laid before Parliament under section 12.'. — [Mr. Djanogly.]
Brought up, and read the First time.
Mr. Djanogly: I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:
New clause 6— Reference of order to Second Reading Committee—
‘Where within the period referred to in section 13, either House of Parliament resolves that the content of an order is inappropriate for provision to be made under section 1 and that such order should be treated as a Bill, then the order may be deemed to be a Bill and shall be referred to a second reading committee.'.
New clause 14— Veto by specified number of Members of House of Commons—
‘No order may be made under Part 1 where both of the following conditions have been fulfilled—
(a) within the period defined in section 13(7), more than 10 per cent. of the members of the House of Commons have signified to the Speaker in writing that they object to the use of the Act for purpose of introducing the order in question, and
(b) the members referred to in subsection (1) above are not all members of the same party.'.
No. 46, in page 8, line 17 [Clause 14], leave out subsection (2) and insert—
‘(2) The Minister may make an order in the terms of the draft order subject to the following provisions of this section.
(2A) The Minister may not make an order in the terms of the draft order if either House of Parliament so resolves within the 40-day period.
(2B) A committee of either House charged with reporting on the draft order may, at any time after the expiry of the 30-day period and before the expiry of the 40-day period, recommend under this subsection that no further proceedings be taken in relation to the draft order.
(2C) A recommendation may be made under subsection (2B) only if the committee considers that—
(a) the provision made by the draft order does not serve the purpose specified in section (Power to remove or reduce burdens)(2), (Power to promote regulatory principles)(2) or (Power to implement Law Commission recommendations)(2) (as the case may be);
(b) any relevant condition in section 3(2) is not satisfied in relation to any provision of the draft order referred to in section 3(1); or
(c) the condition in section 3(4) is not satisfied in relation to any provision of the draft order referred to in section 3(3).
(2D) Where a recommendation is made by a committee of either House under subsection (2B) in relation to a draft order, the Minister may not make an order in the terms of the draft order unless the recommendation is, in the same Session, rejected by resolution of that House.'.
As Amendments to Hilary Armstrong's proposed Amendment (No. 46):—
(a), in line 5, leave out from ‘with' to end of line 18 and insert
‘responsibility for this matter may, at any time after the expiry of the 30-day period and before the expiry of the 40-day period, recommend that no further proceedings be taken in relation to the draft order.'.
Amendment (b), in line 9, leave out from beginning to end of line 18.
Amendment (c), in line 9, leave out from beginning to end of line 22.
Amendment (d), in line 20, leave out from first ‘order' to ‘the recommendation' in line 21 and insert
‘no order may be made under this Part in the terms of the draft order unless either—
(i) at least two years have passed since the recommendation was made, and
(ii) the procedure to be observed under this Part has been observed anew, or
Government amendments Nos. 47 to 49
No. 50, in page 8, line 31 [Clause 15], at end insert—
‘(2A) However, a committee of either House charged with reporting on the draft order may, at any time after the expiry of the 30-day period and before the expiry of the 40-day period, recommend under this subsection that no further proceedings be taken in relation to the draft order.
(2B) A recommendation under subsection (2A) may be made only if the committee considers that—
(a) the provision made by the draft order does not serve the purpose specified in section (Power to remove or reduce burdens)(2), (Power to promote regulatory principles)(2) or (Power to implement Law Commission recommendations)(2) (as the case may be);
(b) any relevant condition in section 3(2) is not satisfied in relation to any provision of the draft order referred to in section 3(1); or
(c) the condition in section 3(4) is not satisfied in relation to any provision of the draft order referred to in section 3(3).
(2C) Where a recommendation is made by a committee of either House under subsection (2A) in relation to a draft order, no proceedings may be taken in relation to the draft order in that House under subsection (2) unless the recommendation is, in the same Session, rejected by resolution of that House.'.
As Amendments to Hilary Armstrong's proposed Amendment (No. 50):—
Amendment (a), in line 1, leave out from ‘with' to end of line 14 and insert
‘responsibility for this matter may, at any time after the expiry of the 30-day period and before the expiry of the 40-day period, recommend that no further proceedings be taken in relation to the draft order.'.
Amendment (b), in line 5, leave out from beginning to end of line 14.
Amendment (c), in line 5, leave out from beginning to end of line 18.
Amendment (e), in line 16, leave out from ‘no' to ‘the recommendation' in line 17 and insert
‘order may be made under this Part in the terms of the draft order unless either—
(i) at least two years have passed since the recommendation was made, and
(ii) the procedure to be observed under this Part has been observed anew, or
Amendment (d), in line 18, at end add—
‘(2D) Where a draft order has been the subject of a recommendation under subsection (2A) and no further proceedings have been taken in the same Session, a Minister may not table a like draft Order within a period of two years after the day before the draft order was laid before Parliament pursuant to section 12.'.
Government amendments Nos. 51 to 53
No. 54, in page 9, line 8 [Clause 16], after subsection (4) insert—
‘(4A) However, a committee of either House charged with reporting on the draft order may, at any time after the laying of a statement under subsection (3) and before the draft order is approved by that House under subsection (4), recommend under this subsection that no further proceedings be taken in relation to the draft order.
(4B) A recommendation under subsection (4A) may be made only if the committee considers that—
(a) the provision made by the draft order does not serve the purpose specified in section (Power to remove or reduce burdens)(2), (Power to promote regulatory principles)(2) or (Power to implement Law Commission recommendations)(2) (as the case may be);
(b) any relevant condition in section 3(2) is not satisfied in relation to any provision of the draft order referred to in section 3(1); or
(c) the condition in section 3(4) is not satisfied in relation to any provision of the draft order referred to in section 3(3).
(4C) Where a recommendation is made by a committee of either House under subsection (4A) in relation to a draft order, no proceedings may be taken in relation to the draft order in that House under subsection (4) unless the recommendation is, in the same Session, rejected by resolution of that House.'.
As Amendments to Hilary Armstrong's proposed Amendment (No. 54):—
Amendment (a), in line 1, leave out from ‘with' to end of line 14 and insert
‘responsibility for this matter may, at any time after the expiry of the 30-day period and before the expiry of the 40-day period, recommend that no further proceedings be taken in relation to the draft order.'.
Amendment (b), in line 5, leave out from beginning to end of line 14.
Amendment (c), in line 5, leave out from beginning to end of line 18.
Amendment (e), in line 16, leave out from ‘no' to ‘the recommendation' in line 17 and insert
‘order may be made under this Part in the terms of the draft order unless either—
(i) at least two years have passed since the recommendation was made, and
(ii) the procedure to be observed under this Part has been observed anew, or
Amendment (d), in line 18, at end add—
‘(4D) Where a draft order has been the subject of a recommendation under subsection (4A) and no further proceedings have been taken in the same Session, a Minister may not table a like draft Order within a period of two years after the day before the draft order was laid before Parliament pursuant to section 12.'.
No. 55, in page 9, line 18 [Clause 16], after subsection (6) insert—
‘(6A) However, a committee of either House charged with reporting on the revised draft order may, at any time after the revised draft order is laid under subsection (5) and before it is approved by that House under subsection (6), recommend under this subsection that no further proceedings be taken in relation to the revised draft order.
(6B) A recommendation under subsection (6A) may be made only if the committee considers that—
(a) the provision made by the revised draft order does not serve the purpose specified in section (Power to remove or reduce burdens)(2), (Power to promote regulatory principles)(2) or (Power to implement Law Commission recommendations)(2) (as the case may be);
(b) any relevant condition in section 3(2) is not satisfied in relation to any provision of the revised draft order referred to in section 3(1); or
(c) the condition in section 3(4) is not satisfied in relation to any provision of the revised draft order referred to in section 3(3).
(6C) Where a recommendation is made by a committee of either House under subsection (6A) in relation to a revised draft order, no proceedings may be taken in relation to the revised draft order in that House under subsection (6) unless the recommendation is, in the same Session, rejected by resolution of that House.'.
As Amendments to Hilary Armstrong's proposed Amendment (No. 55):—
Amendment (a), in line 1, leave out from ‘with' to end of line 15 and insert
‘responsibility for this matter may, at any time after the expiry of the 30-day period and before the expiry of the 40-day period, recommend that no further proceedings be taken in relation to the draft order.'.
Amendment (b), in line 6, leave out from beginning to end of line 15.
Amendment (c), in line 6, leave out from beginning to end of line 19.
Amendment (e), in line 17, leave out from ‘no' to ‘ the recommendation' in line 17 and insert
‘order may be made under this Part in the terms of the revised draft order unless either—
(i) at least two years have passed since the recommendation was made, and
(ii) the procedure to be observed under this Part has been observed anew, or
Amendment (d), in line 19, at end add—
‘(6D) Where a draft order has been the subject of a recommendation under subsection (6A) and no further proceedings have been taken in the same Session, a Minister may not table a like draft Order within a period of two years after the day before the draft order was laid before Parliament pursuant to section 12.'.
Mr. Djanogly: This important group of amendments seeks to introduce similar changes to clauses 14, 15 and 16, which outline the procedure that would apply when an order is to be made under the negative resolution procedure, the affirmative resolution procedure or the super-affirmative resolution procedure. One of our long-held criticisms of the Bill is that it lacks adequate safeguards for the use of its fast-track order-making powers, which many people believe will abolish our constitutional longstops. The Bill has widely become known as the “abolition of Parliament Bill”.
We supported the Government’s amendments to part 1 of the Bill yesterday, following their stated intention that the Bill would deal only with deregulation. However, we made it clear that our overall support would depend on the introduction of further safeguards. The introduction of a procedural veto to the Bill, which would be exercised either by the Houses of Parliament or by Select Committees, was one of the primary mechanisms recommended by my hon. Friend the Member for North-East Hertfordshire (Mr. Heald) and me on Second Reading, as a means of introducing such safeguards.
For that reason, an amendment to clause 16 was tabled in Committee. It would have required an order to have been withdrawn or amended if an amendment to the order had been agreed by one or both of the Houses of Parliament or by the relevant Committees of either House. The amendment would have granted Parliament the power to insist on amendments to the order which, if not accepted by the Minister, would have to be withdrawn. The Minister would then have to start the process all over again.
The Conservatives were, admittedly, far from being the only ones calling for a parliamentary veto on the use of the procedures in the Bill. The Liberal Democrats have done the same, and I noted with interest the reports of the Regulatory Reform and Public Administration Committees, among whose recommendations was a call for an amendment to the Bill to provide scope for an effective veto.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |