4Conclusion
45.While the Government has continued to make a compelling case for the reforms to Horseracing Betting Levy, it has not made the case for the use of a Legislative Reform Order to achieve its aims.
46.Our scrutiny of the draft Order has found that it does not make appropriate use of delegated legislation, does not provide certainty on the reductions of burdens on which it is predicated, and removes the right of scrutiny under the Freedom of Information Act and by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. We therefore find that the draft Order does not meet required preconditions and tests for a Legislative Reform Order to be made.
47.Under the super-affirmative procedure, it is now for the Government to decide whether to proceed with the draft Order, and if it does proceed, whether it should be amended prior to being brought back before the House. Should the Government seek to proceed with the draft Order as currently presented to Parliament, we would expect to report that no further proceedings be taken in relation to it. The Government should bring forward primary legislation to enable full scrutiny of these measures.
Published: 7 December 2018