WEDNESDAY: What's on Parliament's agenda today?
❓ Prime Minister's Questions
💰 Pension Schemes Bill (Lords amendments)
🏛️ Peers expected to pass English Devolution Bill
📄 Select committee hearing on WPQs
More detail below 🔽
buff.ly/8QBUm5k
Today the House of Lords is debating motions relating to a 'Statement of Changes' to the Immigration Rules.
We discussed the legislative process for changing the Immigration Rules in a recent episode of our podcast.
www.hansardsociety.org.uk/news/parliam...
And six MPs representing constituencies in that region - each among the top ten for signatures - spoke in the debate. 3/3
By comparison, the e-petition proposing a "new disclosure and safeguarding mechanism for at-risk children" - aka “Maya’s Law”, following the death of Maya Chappell in 2022 in Durham - saw support concentrated in the North East of England. 2/3
🧵 Two e-petitions debated in the House of Commons yesterday - each signed by more than 100K people - show a notable contrast when mapped geographically.
The e-petition calling for "statutory menstrual leave for people with endometriosis and adenomyosis" attracted support from across the UK. 1/3
17/ How secondary legislation works - the legislative lifecycle - is covered in my book, The Devil is in the Detail: Parliament and Delegated Legislation. Some detail is now dated but the parliamentary processes have not changed. Free to download 👇(THE END)
www.hansardsociety.org.uk/publications...
16/ @darcyxtip.bsky.social and I will be discussing this in the next episode of our Parliament Matters podcast (Fri am). Subscribe on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts if you want to really understand what’s going on and what’s at stake.
www.hansardsociety.org.uk/news/parliam...
15/ But again, it's usually less effective scrutiny than would apply if the equivalent change were made through a new Bill rather than a Statutory Instrument, not least because a Bill can be amended and an SI cannot.
14/ That means a debate and vote in one or both Houses is required before the Statutory Instrument can be made. So in practice, Henry VIII powers are often paired with more, not less, formal parliamentary scrutiny than most secondary legislation gets.
13/ But an important clarification to the media write-ups today...
Where secondary legislation is made using a Henry VIII power, it will usually be subject to the affirmative scrutiny procedure.
12/ This is especially concerning where Henry VIII powers in Acts give Ministers wide “supplementary powers”, including the ability to amend the Act itself. That hands Ministers significant discretion to reshape legislation after the fact.
11/ But not all Henry VIII powers are benign. Some go to the heart of how Parliament works.
If Ministers can come back later and amend an Act via Statutory Instrument, it raises an obvious question: what was the point of Parliament’s detailed scrutiny in the first place?
10/ In some cases, Henry VIII powers serve a practical purpose, for example, allowing Ministers to update references across the statute book after Parliament has already approved a policy change.
9/ The concern is constitutional: it shifts law-making power away from Parliament to Ministers.
Henry VIII powers are now a regular feature of modern legislation, but their use is not always contentious.
8/ A Henry VIII power in an Act of Parliament, gives Ministers the power to amend or repeal primary legislation (Acts) via secondary legislation (usually Statutory Instruments), which leads to less scrutiny than the equivalent change made through a new Act.
7/ Second: Henry VIII powers are being widely misdescribed.
They do not “allow ministers to approve laws without full scrutiny.”
That’s not what they are.
6/ Secondary (or delegated) legislation is generally subject to either:
- the negative procedure, where it becomes law unless Parliament objects within a set period (usually 40 days), or
- the affirmative procedure, where it must be debated and approved before it can become law.
5a/ - Scrutiny procedures are superficial and often a waste of time, particularly in the House of Commons.
- There is no penalty for poor-quality Explanatory Memoranda and other supporting documentation.
5/ Just a few examples of the problems...
- Parliament has no power of amendment, and the risk of an SI being rejected is negligible.
- Government control of the House of Commons agenda restricts MPs’ ability to secure debates on Statutory Instruments of concern.
4/ Parliament does have oversight mechanisms for secondary (aka delegated or subordinate legislation) but these are ineffective, even in those cases where a debate and vote is required.
3/ So claiming something is problematic because it won’t get a “normal parliamentary vote" misunderstands how the system already works.
2/ In practice, most secondary legislation (usually in the form of Statutory Instruments) is never voted on at all. Around three quarters passes through Parliament without a vote, EU-related or not. And even when a vote is required, it’s often nodded through without a division.
There’s a lot of confusion right now among journalists and MP about secondary legislation and what a possible EU deal would mean.
A quick thread to clear a few things up on votes, Henry VIII powers & parliamentary scrutiny. 🧵
1/ First: what is a “normal parliamentary vote”?
Mr D'Arcy has already messaged me several times about this in the last 24 hours, and as you know it is my favourite subject ...so, I think you will get your wish!
NEW: Parliament returns this week. What will MPs and Peers be debating and voting on?
Our weekly Bulletin is out now.
Find out what your Parliament is doing, when and why.
[Link to the full Bulletin is in the next post⬇️]
29/ The next departmental questions to defence ministers is scheduled for 11 May when Parliament will be prorogued. So MPs will have to wait for an opportunity in the next Session to press Ministers on what went wrong, and how and when the process will be rerun.
28/ Polly Miller-Perkins may prove to be a first-class appointment. But this was not the way Ministers intended to appoint the first Commissioner, and it has been far from ideal from Parliament’s perspective.
27/ The first Armed Forces Commissioner will play a pivotal role in shaping the office – shaping expectations for service personnel and their families, as well as for Ministers and Parliament.
26/ Nothing in this thread is intended as a critique of Polly Miller-Perkins. Rather, it is a critique of the extent to which MPs have been able to hold Ministers accountable to Parliament for it.
25/ As might be expected of a recently serving officer, the Commissioner acknowledged having had limited prior engagement with politicians, Parliament and the media. Nonetheless, Defence Committee MPs were reassured that Polly Miller-Perkins was a suitable candidate for the role.