1 Background to the
inquiry
1. In January 2005, the Procedures Committee of
the Scottish Parliament announced a major inquiry into the operation
of the Sewel Convention[1],
ie, the process whereby the Scottish Parliament ("Holyrood")
is asked to give its consent to a Westminster Bill that would
change the law on a devolved matter or alter the powers devolved
to Holyrood or to the Scottish Executive.
2. The Procedures Committee published its Report
on 5 October 2005.[2] It
made a number of recommendations for changes to how the Scottish
Parliament dealt with Sewel motions,[3]
which would replace the then current, and largely ad hoc,
procedures "with a framework of new rules to improve transparency
and to enhance the opportunity for parliamentary scrutiny".[4]
The recommendations included:
a requirement on the Scottish Executive to provide
information about any Scottish implications arising from Bills
announced in the Queen's speech; and
a requirement on the Executive to provide a detailed
memorandum at an earlier stage in the Westminster process thus
giving the Scottish Parliament more time for scrutiny.[5]
3. The Committee also encouraged Scottish Ministers
to make more time available for debates on Sewel motions which
dealt with major issues, and proposed replacing the term "Sewel
motions" with "Legislative Consent motions".[6]
4. The Procedures Committee also made a number of
suggestions as to how Westminster could change its own procedures
in what it described as "a spirit of constructive inter-parliamentary
dialogue."[7] Those
suggestions were:
the tagging of Bills in progress at Westminster to
which the Sewel Convention would apply so that Westminster knew
which Bills were involved;
the question of having explanatory notes in every
Bill outlining whether the Bill triggered off the Sewel Convention
and in what ways it engaged in the convention; and
a formal process for the Scottish Parliament to notify
Westminster when a "legislative consent motion" had
been passed, so that there would be contact from Parliament to
Parliament, rather than simply going through Ministers.[8]
5. On 19 October 2005, we took evidence from Rt
Hon Alistair Darling MP, the then Secretary of State for Scotland,
on the Scotland Office's Departmental Annual Report. During questioning
on whether Westminster had dealt effectively with Sewel motions,
the Secretary of State responded:
"…whilst it is probably fair to say that
Members of the Scottish Parliament are very aware of there being
a Sewel motion because they have debated it, my guess is Members
of this Parliament are probably not aware either (a) that there
is one, or (b) what happened to it. That is something which is
obviously outside my responsibility. It is a matter for the House,
but the House has a Procedure Committee and it, too, will probably
want to study this to see whether or not it would be of assistance
to Members generally if they knew, firstly that there was a Sewel
motion, and secondly what was happening to it and what the considerations
were. You may want to make recommendations on that, I do not know,
but that is really for the House, it is not for the Government."
[9]
6. The remit of the Scottish Affairs Committee,
as set out in the Standing Orders of the House of Commons, includes
having responsibility for relations with the Scottish Parliament.[10]
Although we had already identified the Sewel Convention and relations
between Westminster and Holyrood as a potential subject for a
future inquiry, the Procedures Committee's report, and the Secretary
of State's response to our questioning, acted as a catalyst.
7. On 27 October 2005, we announced that we would
be holding our own inquiry into The Sewel Convention: the Westminster
perspective. We stated that we would not be inquiring into
Sewel motions per se, but rather how Members of Parliament
could be better made aware that a particular Bill before the House
of Commons had been subject to a Sewel motion in the Scottish
Parliament - for example, perhaps by a more formal communication
between Holyrood and Westminster, and the other possible changes
to Westminster procedures promulgated by the Procedures Committee
in its report.[11]
8. Subsequently, the Scottish Parliament debated,
and approved, the proposed changes to its own procedures on 23
November 2005.[12]
Although, therefore, Sewel motions are now officially entitled
Legislative Consent motions, we have used "Sewel" throughout
this Report as the term people will most immediately recognise.
1 Procedures Committee News Release, CPROC 001/2005,
18 January 2005. Back
2
Procedures Committee 7th Report, 2005, The Sewel
Convention, SP Paper 428. Back
3
The "Sewel Convention" and "Sewel motions"
are named after Lord Sewel, the then Scottish Office Minister
responsible for steering the Scotland Bill through the House of
Lords in July 1998. Back
4
Procedures Committee News Release, CPROC 004/2005, 5 October 2005. Back
5
Ibid. Back
6
Ibid. Back
7
Procedures Committee 7th Report, 2005, The Sewel
Convention, SP Paper 428, para 203. Back
8
Ibid, paras 204-207. Back
9
Scottish Affairs Committee, Minutes of Evidence, 19 October 2005,
Scotland Office Annual Report 2005, HC (2005-06) 580-i,
Q18. Back
10
S.O. No. 152(2). Back
11
Scottish Affairs Committee Press Notice No. 3 of Session 2005-2006,
27 October 2005. Back
12
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/officialReports/meetingsParliament/or-05/sor1123-02.htm#Col20980. Back
| 
