Procedure for scrutiny
10. The Draft Constitutional Reform Bill was
set down to be examined by a Joint Committee. We note the recent
comments of the Liaison Committee in relation to the practice
of decisions to refer a Draft Bill to a Joint Committee without
proper consultation with the relevant House of Commons departmental
select committee:
While we recognise that some draft bills will be
particularly suited to scrutiny by joint committees, it is for
the House, not the Executive, to assess the most effective form
of scrutiny, and we object strongly to the fact that the Government
has sought to pre-empt the House's consideration of how to scrutinise
draft bills by bringing forward motions for the appointment of
joint committees without proper consultation. We reiterate the
comment of our predecessor committee in 2005: there should be
a presumption in favour of draft bills going to departmental select
committees for pre-legislative scrutiny, where they are ready
and willing to undertake this.[13]
We concur with the views of the Liaison Committee
and reject the assumption that the Government should decide the
means by which Draft Bills are scrutinised.
11. Notwithstanding the decision to refer the
Draft Bill to a Joint Committee, the Public Administration Select
Committee examined parts of the Draft Bill and the accompanying
White Paper relating to the Civil Service, lawmaking powers, treaties,
passports and the royal prerogative. It published its Report
on Wednesday 4 June.[14]
12. In consultation with representatives of the
Government and colleagues on the Joint Committee on the Bill,
we decided to carry out an inquiry into the provisions in the
Draft Bill relating to the Attorney General in order to follow
on from the work of our predecessor Committee. We note that the
Joint Committee has also been taking evidence on these provisions.
We have co-operated with them to the full and exchanged the written
evidence which both Committees have received. Our inquiry has
been a short one, in order to complement the work of the Joint
Committee and contribute our views to the process of scrutiny
of the Draft Bill within the challenging timetable set for the
completion of their work. The main part of the Joint Committee
evidence on the provisions affecting the Attorney General will
be taken after completion of our inquiry, but we note the useful
evidence taken by them so far.[15]
13. We would like to express our gratitude to
colleagues on the Joint Committee for their co-operation and to
those who gave us oral and written evidence.[16]
Purpose of the report
14. Our inquiry did not range across all provisions
of the Draft Bill. We concentrated solely on the provisions relating
to the Attorney General, in the light of our predecessor Committee's
previous Report.
15. The purpose of this Report is:
- to examine the proposed provisions
of the draft Constitutional Renewal Bill to see how far they put
into effect the recommendations of the previous Report; and
- to see how far the Draft Bill is likely to achieve
the target of enhancing public confidence in the office of the
Attorney General.
2 Constitutional Affairs Committee, Fifth Report of
Session 2006-07, Constitutional Role of the Attorney General,
HC 306; the Constitutional Affairs Committee operated as the Justice
Committee from the creation of the Ministry of Justice on 9 May
2007. We were formally re-named with an extended membership on
6 November 2007. Back
3
Ibid., Summary Back
4
Ibid., Summary Back
5
At the time of writing, this case is sub judice Back
6
Seventh Report of Session 2007-08, HL Paper 93 Back
7
Ministry of Justice, The Governance of Britain, July 2007
Cm 7170, p 5 Back
8
Ministry of Justice, The Governance of Britain -Constitutional
Renewal, March 2008 Cm 7342-I, para 32. Back
9
Attorney General, The Governance of Britain, A Consultation
on the Role of the Attorney General, July 2007, Cm 7192 Back
10
Attorney General, The Governance of Britain, A Consultation
on the Role of the Attorney General, July 2007 Cm 7342-III,
paras 70 & 84 Back
11
Justice Committee, Second Special Report of Session 2007-08, Constitutional
Role of the Attorney General: Government Response to
Committee's Fifth Report of Session 2006-07, HC 242, p1-2 Back
12
Ministry of Justice, Cm 7342-I,-II, and -III Back
13
Liaison Committee, Third Report of Session 2007-08, The work
of committees in 2007, HC 427, para 25; and see Liaison Committee,
First Report of Session 2004-05, Annual Report for 2004,
HC 419, para 38 Back
14
Public Administration Select Committee, Tenth Report of Session
2007-08, Constitutional Renewal: Draft Bill and White Paper,
HC 499 Back
15
Uncorrected transcripts of evidence taken before the Joint Committee
on the Draft Bill, HC 551-i-viii. Back
16
See p34 Back
