Committee amendments to Government
Bills
47. Last year we said that we would "suggest
amendments to give effect to our recommendations where possible,
with a view to Members of our Committee tabling and speaking to
them in debate in both Houses".[56]
This followed our initial experience in tabling amendments to
three bills in the 2006-07 session. In doing this we aim to raise
the profile of human rights issues, and our work, in both Houses
by connecting more closely the reports we publish with the legislative
process and to enable Members of both Houses to join the debate
on the issues we have raised.
48. In his reply to our last annual report, the Human
Rights Minister struck a decidedly unenthusiastic note. Although
"in principle" he could "see the merit in creating
an opportunity, particularly during the Committee stage of a Bill
in either House, for Members to discuss major issues raised by
the Joint Committee in its report on that Bill" he went on
suggest that:
"the Committee considers carefully the implications
of tabling large numbers of amendments, particularly at Report
stage in the House of Commons, that give effect to all of the
Committee's recommendations on a Bill, or which relate predominantly
to the Committee's conclusions in a thematic report. In practice,
this would lead to the Government responding twice to the Committee's
recommendations - once in writing and again in debate - and taking
up valuable time on the floor of the House without giving any
opportunity for a focussed debate on a point of significant human
rights interest."
49. These comments reflected remarks by Ben Bradshaw
MP, Minister of State at the Department of Health, in replying
to amendments we tabled to the Health and Social Care Bill at
Report stage in the Commons in February. He said:[57]
"I understand that proposing a large number
of amendments in this way represents a new approach for the Joint
Committee, but in this instance I am not sure that it is the most
effective way to proceed. Where the Government are giving undertakings
or are already pursuing a particular policy, I hope that the Committee
will accept those undertakings rather than pursue the course of
specifying every last detail directly in the legislation."
50. Our response was to remind the Minister that
we would decide on the effectiveness of the initiative in the
light of experience and that the Minister's reaction was "encouragement
to continue".[58]
51. A list of issues on which we tabled amendments
to Bills, a brief account of how the amendments fared, and their
outcome, can be found in Annex 3. Our main achievements were
as follows:
- We played a major role in persuading
the Government of the need to bring private sector care homes
within the ambit of the Human Rights Act, in relation to publicly-funded
residents. Our amendment to the Health and Social Care Bill was
debated in both Houses before the Government brought forward its
own amendment in the House of Lords.
- Other amendments to the Health and Social Care
Bill - on the Care Quality Commission and regulation making powers
in relation to public health - were made by the Government in
the House of Lords in response to points we had pressed in debate.
- We tabled amendments to the Counter-Terrorism
Bill to remove the provisions relating to 42 days pre-charge detention
and coroners' inquests. The relevant clauses were withdrawn by
the Government.
- We persuaded the Government to bring forward
amendments in the House of Lords to the Criminal Justice and Immigration
Bill on Youth Rehabilitation Orders, Premises Closure Orders,
Violent Offender Orders and the sentencing of children.
- We proposed an amendment to the Employment Bill
to clarify the circumstances in which a trade union can exclude
or expel a person from membership because of their membership
of a political party, in order to comply with the judgment of
the European Court of Human Rights in the Aslef case. Two
of our Members - Lord Morris of Handsworth and Lord Lester of
Herne Hill - were involved in discussions with the Government
about the precise wording before a final version, similar to the
amendment we had proposed, was agreed by both Houses.
52. The publication and tabling of Committee amendments
has, in our view, raised our profile in both Houses, raised the
profile of human rights issues - particularly on the Counter-Terrorism,
Health and Social Care and Criminal Justice and Immigration Bills
- and been effective in contributing to changes to legislation.
We intend to continue tabling amendments to Bills, focusing as
before on what we consider to be the most significant issues.
We also intend to continue framing amendments which give effect
to recommendations in our thematic reports and deal with adverse
court judgments on human rights issues.
53. Parliamentary rules do not provide for amendments
to be tabled by a Committee, so our amendments are tabled in the
names of individual Members in the relevant House. This could
make it difficult to distinguish amendments which have been agreed
and published by the Committee from those tabled by our Members
in their individual capacities, particularly in the Commons where
the pressure on debating time is most intense. We see merit
in exploring whether Committees could table amendments to Bills
in the House of Commons in their own name, rather than in the
names of individual Members, and will raise this matter with the
Commons Liaison Committee.
54. Another problem in the Commons is the scarcity
of debating time at Report stage, especially for backbench amendments
and often for Government new clauses and amendments. We tabled
an amendment to the Children and Young Persons Bill intended to
bring private sector providers of social work services within
the ambit of the Human Rights Act, but the amendment was not called
because of lack of time. The House was deprived of the opportunity
to debate an important human rights issue raised by the bill because
the programme motion did not provide sufficient time. We intend
to continue monitoring occasions in the House of Commons where
our amendments, and Government new clauses and amendments raising
significant human rights concerns, are not reached because of
lack of time and communicate our concerns to the Modernisation
Committee when it next considers the operation of programming.
Civil society input into legislative
scrutiny work
55. We publish a considerable volume of information
about our work on our website, including a summary of the main
points we intend to raise about a bill and our detailed letters
to Ministers. This often elicits memoranda from NGOs and others
about bills and we also often receive the briefings prepared by
such organisations for parliamentary debates.
56. The publication in draft of the Government's
legislative programme has helped us plan our work and attract
more civil society input. We announced in July that we were
likely to focus in particular on the Coroners and Death Certification,
Equality and Immigration and Citizenship Bills and that there
were a number of other bills also likely to raise human rights
concerns. We published a call for evidence on these proposed bills
and have so far received over 50 submissions, principally in relation
to the draft (partial) Immigration and Citizenship Bill. In addition,
we included sessions in our awayday in November on immigration
and equality issues and organised briefing meetings on the draft
(partial) Immigration and Citizenship Bill with the bill team
and the Immigration Law Practitioners Association. The contents
of the Queen's Speech included some significant changes since
the publication of the draft legislative programme, most notably
a less comprehensive Borders, Immigration and Citizenship Bill
and the dropping for now of the Communications Data Bill. Nevertheless,
we welcome the Government's decision to publish its legislative
programme in draft because it has enabled us to scrutinise its
proposals more effectively. We encourage the Government to continue
this practice and to publish more bills in draft.
28 In clearing a bill from scrutiny we decide not to
engage in further work on the Bill - such as writing to the appropriate
Minister or publishing a report - because we consider that the
bill does not raise significant human rights issues. Back
29
For more details of our working practices see Working practices
report and 2007 annual report. Back
30
2007 annual report: Government reply, p9. Back
31
2007 annual report, paragraph 41 and 2007 annual report:
Government reply, p10. Back
32
STC report. Back
33
Correspondence relating to this issue is published on our website
and with this Report, pp 47-49 Back
34
The oral evidence from Liam Byrne MP, then immigration minister,
in February is published online and will shortly be published
in hard copy. The oral evidence from the Home Secretary in October
is published with this Report, Ev 11 Back
35
Tenth Report, Session 2007-08, Counter-Terrorism Policy and
Human Rights (Ninth Report): Annual Renewal of Control Orders
Legislation 2008, HC 356, HL Paper 57 and Twenty-fifth Report,
Session 2007-08, Counter-Terrorism Policy and Human Rights
(Twelfth Report): Annual Renewal of 28 Days 2008, HC 825,
HL Paper 132. Back
36
42 Days report. Back
37
Session 2007-08, Report of the Joint Committee on the draft
Constitutional Renewal Bill, HC551-II, HL Paper 166-II, Ev 78. Back
38
See table 4. Back
39
E.g. Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill, Health and Social
Care Bill, Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill, Housing and
Regeneration Bill, Education and Skills Bill. Back
40
E.g. Health and Social Care Bill, Children and Young Persons Bill,
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill, Housing and Regeneration
Bill. Back
41
E.g. Counter-Terrorism Bill, Health and Social Care Bill, annual
renewal of control orders, annual renewal of 28 days pre-charge
detention. Back
42
E.g. Housing and Regeneration Bill, annual renewal of control
orders. Back
43
E.g. Health and Social Care Bill, annual renewal of control orders,
annual renewal of 28 days pre-charge detention. Back
44
E.g. Education and Skills Bill. Back
45
E.g. annual renewal of control orders, Criminal Justice and Immigration
Bill (Violent Offender Orders). Back
46
E.g. Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill. Back
47
E.g. Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill, Children and Young
Persons Bill, Secure Training Centre (Amendment) Rules, Education
and Skills Bill. Back
48
Data protection report. Back
49
2007 annual report, paragraph 24. Back
50
Ibid, paragraph 26. Back
51
For example, the provisions in the Counter-Terrorism Bill relating
to post-charge questioning. Back
52
For example, see Seventeenth Report, Session 2007-08, Legislative
Scrutiny: 1) Employment Bill; 2) Housing and Regeneration Bill;
3) Other Bills, HC 501, HL Paper 95, appendix 4. Back
53
We will be publishing the submissions we have received on our
website during January 2009. Back
54
2007 annual report, paragraphs 29-30. Back
55
2007 annual report: Government reply, p9. Back
56
2007 annual report, paragraph 42. Back
57
HC Deb, 18 Feb 08, c58. Back
58
Fifteenth Report, Session 2007-08, Legislative Scrutiny,
HC 440, HL Paper 81, paragraph 3.6. Back
