Chamber and committees

The final area of questioning is on the issue of Henry VIII powers, which tend to bring some controversy any time they are spoken about.

Prior to the publication of the bill, the Public Law Project, in written evidence to the House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee’s inquiry into retained EU law, stated:

“A broad Henry VIII power for the UK Executive to make law in any area of former EU competence would be constitutionally inappropriate.”

The Scottish Parliament’s Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee, in its recent report titled “The Impact of Brexit on Devolution”, stated:

“The Committee’s view is that the extent of UK Ministers’ new delegated powers in devolved areas amounts to a significant constitutional change. We have considerable concerns that this has happened and is continuing to happen on an ad hoc and iterative basis without any overarching consideration of the impact on how devolution works.”

Do the witnesses have any comment about the Henry VIII nature of many of the powers contained in the bill?

Colleagues have no further questions. Do panel members have anything to put on the record that they have not already highlighted?

Under agenda item 3, we are considering an instrument on which no points have been raised.

Under agenda item 4, we are considering an instrument on which no points have been raised.

Before I bring in the other witnesses, I will make a point regarding your first category. Certainly, it could be quite time consuming to pull something together in order to bring in emergency legislation. On the issue of capacity, which was raised earlier, as I asked Sir Jonathan, does the civil service actually have the capacity to look at all the legislation that is currently there? Dr Tucker indicated that officials would have to engage with all the legislation that is there. Given the short time that we have, there is a possibility that not every piece of legislation will be engaged with in order to make an active decision before a sunsetting happens or does not happen on each particular piece of legislation. I suggest that, given the capacity issue and the short timescale—notwithstanding the potential to extend the sunsetting—litigation could be a regular occurrence if businesses or trade sectors ended up being caught in something that was not fully considered beforehand.

No problem.

I thank Sir Jonathan Jones, Dr Adam Tucker and Morag Ross KC for their extremely helpful evidence. The committee may follow up by letter any additional questions that stem from the meeting.

I suspend the meeting briefly to allow Morag Ross to leave the room and the other witnesses to leave BlueJeans.

Is the committee content with the instrument?

Members indicated agreement.

Is the committee content with the instrument?

Members indicated agreement.

Is the committee content with the instrument?

Members indicated agreement.

Welcome to the 32nd meeting in 2022 of the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee. Before we move to the first item on the agenda, I remind everyone present to switch mobile phones to silent.

The first item of business is to decide whether to take item 6 in private. Is the committee content to do so?

Members indicated agreement.