header-logo header-logo

13 October 2020
Issue: 7906 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Brexit: Law in a rush?

The Public Law Project (PLP) has highlighted serious flaws in the parliamentary process for delegated legislation in the run-up to Brexit

Its report, ‘Plus ça change? Brexit and the flaws of the delegated legislative system’, published this week, focuses on hundreds of statutory instruments (SIs) that were ‘rubber-stamped’ ahead of Brexit. During the 2017-2019 parliamentary session, 1,835 SIs were laid in total, 615 of which were Brexit-related (about a third). The wordcount of Treasury and HMRC instruments increased fourfold and the average page length of Brexit-related instruments was double the norm.

The report raises concerns about the lack of impact assessments, which were either ‘poor or non-existent’. It highlights the lack of parliamentary debate, noting the government used the urgency procedure 30 times to give SIs immediate legal effect, before they had been debated. Moreover, Henry VIII powers were used by ministers to amend primary legislation that had already been passed by Parliament, in 142 of the 622 Brexit SIs.

The number of legislative errors and mistakes increased, resulting in 97 SIs being laid before Exit Day to fix the mistakes of earlier SIs introduced in the same parliamentary session.

Dr Joe Tomlinson, the PLP’s research director, said: ‘It is the combination of deficiencies that is most concerning.

‘SIs are not meant to bring about important changes in policy because of the lack of scrutiny they allow, but many did exactly that. Parliament was shut out of a significant part of law-making.

‘Those instruments touched on every part of UK life, from food safety to immigration to transport. Very significant policies such as alterations to deportation thresholds and changes to social security law were placed in secondary legislation with no explanation as to why and no mechanism to check the government’s decision to do so.’

Tomlinson called for reform, warning the same problems were now arising in relation to COVID-19.

Issue: 7906 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit , Constitutional law
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll