Fourth Report
Instruments Drawn To The Special Attention
Of The House
The Committee has considered the following instruments
and has determined that the special attention of the House should
be drawn to them on the grounds specified.
A. Draft Freedom of Information (Parliament)
Order 2009
Summary: This Order amends the provisions of the
Freedom of Information Act in relation to the publication of expenses
claimed by or paid to Members of either House. It limits the information
that must be provided to an annual gross figure (not including
any money spent on security arrangements) in respect of each Member.
No justification is given in the EM why these additional measures
are required over and above SI 2008/1967 rushed through in July
2008 in response to MPs' concerns about their personal security.
Members may well wish to ask the Government why the Order is necessary,
what is its policy objective and what is the explanation for the
exceptional hurry which has limited the normal scrutiny process.
(The Order was laid on 14 January and is scheduled to be debated
on 22 January.)
This Order is drawn to the special attention of
the House on the ground that it may imperfectly achieve its policy
objectives.
1. The Ministry of Justice have laid these Regulations
under section 7(3)(a) and (b) of the Freedom of Information Act
2000, together with an Explanatory Memorandum (EM).
2. This Order amends the provisions of the Freedom
of Information Act in relation to the publication of expenses
claimed by or paid to Members of either House. It limits the information
that must be provided to an annual gross figure (not including
any money spent on security arrangements) in respect of each Member.
3. The Committee notes that the Order affects
a large number of Members of this House, and of the other place.
We have none the less sought to deal with the Order in exactly
the same way as any other instrument coming before the Committee.
4. The supporting material is deficient: no justification
is given in the EM why these additional measures are required
over and above the previous SI, rushed through in July 2008[1],
which was intended to deal in particular with MPs' concerns about
their personal security. The EM states the purpose of the Order
is to change the scope of the application of the Act but does
not set out the policy objective this change is designed to implement.
This absence of clarity makes it impossible for the Committee
to make a judgement whether the Order actually achieves its policy
objectives. When the Order is debated Members will wish to
seek an explanation from the Government why the Order is necessary
and what its objective is.
5. The Committee also records its dissatisfaction
with the accelerated timetable imposed[2],
which has prevented us from seeking any evidence on the Order,
and limits our ability to make a considered report to the House.
We would have wished to seek views from interested parties such
as the Committee on Standards in Public Life, whose Chairman was
reported in the press as saying "MPs above all should
be subject to the Freedom of Information law since they are the
ones who made it. I do not think that anyone has really made the
case for this change." Similarly Maurice Frankel, director
of the Campaign for Freedom of Information, is reported as commenting
on the disparity this instrument would introduce, saying "Chief
Constables, local authority chief executives and others have to
release individual expenses claims" and arguing that
MPs should be treated the same as other public figures. Members
may well therefore also wish to seek an explanation for the haste
which has limited the normal scrutiny process.
6. Paragraph 8.2 of the EM indicates that the
House of Commons will consider a motion alongside the instrument
setting out some categories of information which might be published
on a voluntary basis. In the past the House of Lords has published
more than the minimal information that would be required by this
Order[3] and it is understood
that the House Committee is to consider what approach it will
wish to take in the light of this new Order at its meeting on
10 February. However whatever agreements either House may come
to about additional information that they may volunteer, only
failure to produce the level of information set out in the Order
can be subject to judicial review.
B. Rent Officers (Housing Benefit Functions)
Amendment (No.2) Order 2008 (SI 2008/3156)
Summary: This Order sets out the way that Broad
Rental Market Areas are to be constructed for the purpose of setting
Housing Benefit rates for claimants living in privately rented
accommodation. It seeks to restore the original policy intention
following a recent House of Lords judgment in Heffernan v the
Rent Service. We note with concern
the very short consultation period on this proposal and the fact
that a significant degree of disagreement with the policy remains.
This Order is drawn to the special attention of
the House on the ground that it gives rise to issues of public
policy likely to be of interest to the House.
7. The Department for Work and Pensions have
laid this Order under sections 122(1) and (6) of the Housing Act
1996, together with an Explanatory Memorandum (EM).
8. This Order sets out the way that Broad Rental
Market Areas are to be constructed for the purpose of setting
Housing Benefit rates for claimants living in privately rented
accommodation. It seeks to restore the original policy intention
following a recent House of Lords judgment in Heffernan v the
Rent Service [4].
9. Broad Rental Market Areas provide local reference
rents which are calculated by Rent Officers according to the statutory
framework. If applied nationally the effect of the Heffernan judgment,
which related to the Sheffield area, would be to significantly
increase the costs of administering the benefit, as it would
result in the number of these rent reference areas (known as "localities")
increasing from the current 193 to over 4,000. The Government
state that reducing the size of the localities would create a
differential in the amounts of benefit paid that would be to the
detriment of those living in poorer areas. These Regulations modify
the legal framework to maintain the original policy intention
that the areas should be large enough to include a range of both
higher and lower rent accommodation. We note with concern the
very short consultation period on this proposal and the fact that
a significant degree of disagreement with the policy remains.
1 Freedom Of Information (Parliament And National Assembly
For Wales) Order 2008 (SI 2008/1967) - laid in draft on 15 July,
made on 22 July, came into effect on 23 July 2008 Back
2
The instrument was laid on 14 January and is scheduled to be debated
on 22 January in both Houses Back
3
http://www.parliament.uk/about_lords/holallowances/hol_expenses04.cfm
Back
4
Heffernan v the Rent Service, 30 July 2008, Session 2007-08, [2008]
UKHL 58, an appeal from [2007] EWCA Civ 544.
Back
| 
