Appendix 2
The scrutiny periods in the 1994 and 2001 Acts
When the Deregulation and Contracting Out Bill
was first introduced (Bill 33 of 1993-94) it included
In this section "the period for Parliamentary
consideration", in relation a document means a period of
forty days beginning on the day on which it is laid before Parliament.[30]
This provision was not changed in Standing Committee.
However, the last act during the Bill's report stage in the Commons
was, in its entirety:
Clause 4 --
Parliamentary consideration of proposals
Amendments made : No. 97, in page 4, line 40, after
means' insert (a)'.
No. 98, in page 4, line 41, leave out is' and insert
was'.
No. 99, in page 4, line 41, at end insert
or
(b) if within the period referred to in paragraph
(a) above a committee of either House reports that there are special
reasons why it will be unable to complete its consideration of
the document before the end of that period, the period of sixty
days beginning on the day on which the document was so laid.'
No. 100, in page 4, line 42, leave out period of
forty' and insert
periods of forty and sixty'.
No. 24, in page 5, line 6, at end insert
(5) Together with a draft of an order laid before
Parliament under section 1(4) above, the Minister concerned shall
lay a statement giving details of
(a) any representations, resolution or report falling
within subsection (4) above ; and
(b) the changes (if any) which, in the light of any
such representations, resolution or report, the Minister has made
to his proposals as contained in the document previously laid
before Parliament under section 3(3) above.
(6) Subsection (5) of section 3 above shall apply
in relation to the representations referred to in subsection (5)(a)
above as it applies in relation to the representations referred
to in subsection (4)(f) of that section.'--[ Mr. Arbuthnot
.]
Clause 4 was further amended during its committee
stage in the House of Lords. Lord Strathclyde, then a Minister
of State at the Department for Trade and Industry introduced the
following amendments:
Lord Strathclyde moved
Amendments No. 52 to 54:
Page 4, line 41, leave out ("forty") and
insert ("sixty").
Page 4, line 42, leave out from ("Parliament")
to end of line 47.
Page 5, line 1, leave out ("periods of forty
and") and insert ("period of").
The noble Lord said: These amendments give effect
to the Government's commitment to extend the period provided for
parliamentary scrutiny of orders under the deregulation order-making
power to 60 days in all cases. I very much hope that this will
meet with the approval of the Committee. I beg to move Amendments
Nos. 552, 53 and 54 en bloc.[31]
The provision in the Deregulation and Contracting
Out Act 1994 then read:
(2) In this section "the period for Parliamentary
consideration", in relation to a document, means the period
of sixty days beginning on the day on which it was laid before
Parliament.[32]
The Regulatory Reform Bill 2000-01, which
was considered in the House of Lords first, contained provision
for parliamentary consideration of 60 days, from the outset:
(2) In this section "the period for Parliamentary
consideration", in relation to a document, means the period
of sixty days beginning on the day on which it was laid before
Parliament.[33]
Lord Norton of Louth tabled a number of amendments,
relating to all aspects of the consultation process, which were
debated during the Committee stage. These included:
Lord Norton of Louth moved
Amendment No. 66:
Page 6, line 17, leave out ("of sixty days beginning
on") and insert ("taken by Parliament to complete its
consideration of the draft order, which shall be no shorter than
forty days, and no more than ninety days, from").[34]
He made the following comments on his amendments:
Under my amendment a draft order can be laid after
40 days if committee deliberation is complete, or it can be delayed
for up to 90 days if the committee wants to take that long. Some
flexibility may be useful. Orders made under the Bill are likely
to differ significantly in scope and effect. Some may require
little parliamentary scrutiny; others may require substantial
scrutiny, perhaps taking longer than is presently the case with
orders under the 1994 Act.
I readily concede that my amendment might not hit
the mark. This is a probing amendment and one that is designed
to elicit a response essentially from two quarters. One is from
members of the Delegated Powers and Deregulation Committee. I
shall be guided by their views as to what is necessary. The other
is from the Government: first, in terms of the thought they have
given to the burden that will fall on the Delegated Powers and
Deregulation Committee; and, secondly, what resources will be
necessary to enable it to fulfil what may well be an onerous duty.
Given that the provisions of the Bill impose a burden on the Committee,
and the Government wants to reduce burdens, it is appropriate
that we turn our minds to achieving that.
My amendment is designed to focus attention on what
is necessary and how we may assist the Committee in discharging
what is likely to be an extremely onerous burden. I beg to move.[35]
After a very short debate on the amendment, he withdrew
it.[36]
Richard Kelly
House of Commons Library
30 Deregulation and Contracting Out Bill 1993-94
(Bill 33 of 1993-94) clause 4(2) Back
31
HL Deb 23 June 1994 c517 Back
32
Deregulation and Contracting Out Act 1994 chapter 40, s4
(2) Back
33
Regulatory Reform Bill 2000-01 [HL Bill 2 of 2000-01] clause
8 (2)tion and Contracting Out Act 1994 chapter 40, s4 (2) Back
34
HL Deb 25 January 2001 c398 Back
35
HL Deb 25 January 2001 c399 Back
36
HL Deb 25 January 2001 c401 Back
| 
