Impact of parliamentary scrutiny analysed

Parliamentary scrutiny does make a difference to the final shape of an Act, research shows—contradicting the widely-held view that Parliament merely acts as a “rubber stamp” for government legislation.

The findings contained in a new book from the Hansard Society— Law in the Making: Influence and Change in the Legislative Process— show that MPs and peers, whether individually or collectively, have a larger impact on legislation than is commonly recognised. External factors also have a marked influence on legislation, often by working closely with parliamentarians, the non-partisan parliamentary think tank discovered.

The society also found that reforms have enhanced parliamentary scrutiny in recent years, but that the volume and complexity of legislation continue to inhibit Parliament’s effectiveness.

It calls for reforms to improve the parliamentary scrutiny process including more structured and straightforward government consultations, an increase in pre-legislative scrutiny and improvements to the committee stage.

Fiona Booth, Hansard Society chief executive, says: “Parliamentary scrutiny, both in the Commons and the Lords, does make a significant difference to legislation.”

The research draws upon the findings from case studies and over 80 interviews with ministers, MPs, peers, government and parliamentary officials and pressure groups.