Appendix: Government Response
Introduction
1. The Government notes the Political and Constitutional
Reform Committee's inquiry and recent report on the impact of
the Queen's and the Prince's Consent on the legislative process.
The report helpfully sheds a light on what is sometimes regarded
as a complex and obscure parliamentary process.
2. The Government recognises that the Queen's
and Prince's Consent is a longstanding parliamentary requirement
for certain Bills and is therefore a matter for Parliament to
decide upon. The Government will continue to actively cooperate
with Parliament and its requirements in relation to the legislative
process.
3. To this end, and in order to help clarify
the process further, the Cabinet Office has taken steps to update
its Guide to Making Legislation, which now provides clearer guidance
to Departments on the issue of Consent (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system
/uploads/attachment_data/file/210917/Guide_to_Making_Legislation_July_2013.pdf).
4. Whilst noting that the issue of Consent remains
a matter for Parliament, this is the Government's response to
each of the Committee's recommendations.
RESPONSES TO CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The process
5. We recommend that the Office of the Parliamentary
Counsel continue proactively to publish its internal documents
that could be of interest to the wider public, unless there is
a strong reason not to do so. (Paragraph 3)
6. The Government recognises that access to information
can help to improve public confidence and trust in our work, which
is why the Government aims to be as open as possible. In the
spirit of transparency, the Government is committed to publishing
further drafting guidance in the future and will continue to publish
other internal documents where it is appropriate to do so. However,
in line with established policy, the Government will protect certain
categories of information, such as legally privileged information
and communications with the Royal Household.
Should Consent continue to be part of the legislative
process?
7. We recommend that, if the House authorities
decide that Consent is needed for a Private Member's Bill, the
Government should as a matter of course seek Consent. This would
remove any suggestion that the Government is using the Consent
process as a form of veto on Bills it does not support. Members
should, in turn, make sure that they publish the text of their
Bill in time for Consent to be sought. (Paragraph 27)
8. It is not the Government's policy or practice
to refuse to seek the Queen's or the Prince's Consent to a Private
Member's Bill in order to block it. The Government will generally
seek Consent for Private Member's Bills upon request, even where
it opposes the Bill, on the basis that Parliament should not be
prevented from debating a matter on account of Consent not having
been sought. However, the Government will not generally seek
Consent if it is clear from the parliamentary timetable that a
Bill has no real prospect of making progress or the text of the
Bill has been submitted without enough time to seek Consent.
9. The Government agrees that Members should
make sure that they publish the text of their Bills in good time
for Consent to be obtained.
10. We entirely accept that correspondence
between the Government and the Royal Household is not normally
published. However, given that the correspondence in this instance
is a matter of routine, we recommend that, when Consent is being
sought for a Private Member's Bill, the letter from the Department
to the Royal Household should be copied to the Member concerned
if the Member requests this. This would increase transparency
and remove any perception of undue Government influence.
(Paragraph 29)
11. As the Committee recognises, the Government
does not normally publish correspondence between it and the Royal
Household, although any request for information will be considered
on its merits and in light of the relevant statutory provisions.
We agree that it would be helpful for Members, who request it,
to be informed when Consent has been received for their Bills
and we will commit to writing separately to Members to advise
them when this happens.
12. We recommend that if a Bill is re-introduced
in a subsequent session the precedent of not seeking resignification
of Consent be followed. (Paragraph 42)
13. The Government supports this recommendation
if a Bill is reintroduced in the session immediately following
its first introduction in the same Parliament. However, as a
requirement relating to the legislative process, whether Consent
needs to be resignified is ultimately a matter for Parliament
to decide upon. It is also for Parliament to decide whether a
Bill is identical.
14. We recommend that Consent should no longer
need to be signified personally by a Privy Counsellor. Consent
should instead be indicated on the Order Paper. This would prevent
a situation in which the absence of a Privy Counsellor meant that
Consent could not be signified, and the debate could not take
place, thus delaying progress on the Bill. (Paragraph 43)
15. It remains a matter for Parliament to decide
upon its legislative procedures and to agree any changes to its
rules.
16. To improve transparency, we recommend
that, if Consent is required for a Bill, the requirement be published
as soon as the Bill is printed. (Paragraph 44)
17. Parliamentary processes are for Parliament
to agree upon and the timing of the publication of the requirement
to obtain Consent remains a matter for the parliamentary authorities
to decide.
18. Currently, in some instances Consent is
signified at Second Reading and in others at Third Reading. We
recommend that Consent be signified at Third Reading in both Houses,
in all instances. (Paragraph 45)
19. The timing of the signifying of Consent is
a parliamentary requirement and it remains an issue for Parliament
to decide upon. However, given that Consent is sought for certain
Bills to be debated, it seems to follow that Consent should be
signified in the early legislative stages of those Bills. The
Government agrees that a consistent approach to signifying Consent
in both Houses would be desirable.
Conclusion
20. The Government is grateful to the Committee
for its consideration of this topic. Whilst we recognise that
the issue of Consent is ultimately a matter for Parliament to
decide upon, the Government remains committed to working with
Parliament and cooperating with its legislative requirements.
| 
