The inquiry is looking at the challenges facing Northern Ireland’s public services (including health, education and the police) and considering: Northern Ireland’s level of need relative to the rest of the UK; the implications of the Autumn Budget for NI public services; and what measures might be included in Northern Ireland's Final Fiscal Framework, including options for raising revenue.

Taking protection of humanitarian workers, the Aid Worker Security Database reports that in 2023, 280 workers died delivering aid. Of the 595 aid workers killed, injured or kidnapped that year, 95% were staff local to the crisis. In terms of humanitarian access, ACAPS assessed that between November 2022 and June 2023, crisis-affected populations in 37 countries were experiencing “extreme access constraints”, up by 5 on the previous period.

This inquiry will seek to understand what the UK Government is doing to address the root causes of this problem through encouraging parties to adhere to IHL. It will also examine how provision for the protection and support of aid delivery workers is built into the Government’s funding arrangements with delivery partners.

This is an opportunity for the Committee to receive oral and written evidence on efforts of the UK Government in encouraging the adherence to IHL by international actors as well as its own responsibilities to the protection of aid workers delivering UK ODA.

Join the conversation on X using @CommonsIDC

Read the call for evidence for more information about this inquiry, and to find out how to submit written evidence through the Committee's online evidence submission portal.

The inquiry will evaluate the effectiveness of recent Government policy in tackling the decline in bus services. It will explore the social and economic consequences of poor connectivity and consider whether innovations in alternative service models could provide solutions. The Committee will also scrutinise how the Government’s proposed bus reforms address the particular challenges faced by rural areas and local authorities outside of major cities.

Please read the call for evidence for more detail about this inquiry.

On 4 December 2024, the Northern Ireland Office laid a proposal for a draft Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 (Remedial) Order 2024 (the ‘Proposed Remedial Order’).

The Joint Committee on Human Rights would like to hear your views.

What is a remedial order?

A remedial order is a form of secondary legislation. They can be used to amend primary or secondary legislation in circumstances specified in section 10 and Schedule 2 of the Human Rights Act 1998. In particular, remedial orders can be used in response to declarations of incompatibility issued by the courts under section 4 of the Human Rights Act 1998.

Background and Declarations of Incompatibility

The Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 (‘the Legacy Act’) received Royal Assent on 18 September 2023. The Act was intended to “address the legacy of the Northern Ireland Troubles and promote reconciliation”.

Judicial review proceedings were brought against the Government in the High Court in Belfast in the case of Re Dillon and Others [2024] NIKB 11. The Applicants challenged the compatibility of various provisions of the Act with the European Convention on Human Rights (‘ECHR’), in particular:

• Article 2 (right to life) and Article 3 (prohibition of torture) ECHR. Article 2 ECHR provides that everyone’s life shall be protected by law. Article 3 ECHR provides that no one shall be subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Both Articles 2 and 3 of the ECHR impose an obligation on the state to ensure that there is an effective official investigation where conduct in breach of the relevant Article is suspected. The UK is obliged to have in place an effective system of criminal law which is capable of deterring the commission of offences by the prevention, investigation and sanctioning of breaches.
• Article 6 (right to a fair trial) ECHR. This right guarantees the right to fair and public hearings before an independent tribunal for determination of civil rights and obligations (or criminal charges). Article 6 can be limited in certain circumstances. However, any restriction must pursue a legitimate aim and be proportionate.

The High Court handed down its judgment on 28 February 2024. The High Court found the following provisions to be incompatible with the ECHR and issued declarations of incompatibility under section 4 of the Human Rights Act 1998 in respect of them:

• The provisions providing for conditional immunity and prohibiting criminal enforcement action: sections 7(3), 12, 19, 20, 21, 22, 39 and 42(1) of the Legacy Act. These provisions were found to be incompatible with Articles 2 and 3 ECHR;
• The retrospective bar to the continuation of all Troubles-related civil actions brought between the First Reading of the Bill in Parliament in May 2022 and the date it came into force in November 2023: section 43(1) of the Legacy Act. This provision was found to be incompatible with Article 6 ECHR;
• The exclusion of material provided to or produced by the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery being used as evidence in other cases, such as civil and coronial proceedings: section 8 of the Legacy Act. This provision was found to be incompatible with Articles 2 and 6 ECHR; and
• The provisions related to the retrospective validation of defective interim custody orders and the bar on civil actions based on those defective interim custody orders: sections 46(2), (3) and (4) and 47(1) and (4) of the Legacy Act. These provisions were found to be incompatible with Article 6 ECHR and Article 1 of Protocol 1 to the ECHR.

The Government and the Applicants both appealed aspects of the High Court’s judgment to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal handed down its judgment on 20 September 2024 (Re Dillon and Others [2024] NICA 59). The Court of Appeal found the following additional aspects of the Legacy Act to be incompatible with the ECHR and issued declarations of incompatibility under section 4 of the Human Rights Act 1998 in respect of them:

• The provisions barring all future Troubles-related civil actions: section 43(2). This provision was found to be incompatible with Article 6 ECHR;
• The provisions related to disclosure of sensitive material. The Court of Appeal found aspects of the Legacy Act’s disclosure regime to be incompatible with Articles 2 and 3 ECHR; and
• The lack of provision in the Legacy Act for effective next of kin participation, especially in the form of Legal Aid for investigations being carried out by the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery. The Court of Appeal found this to be incompatible with Articles 2 and 3 ECHR.

It was a manifesto commitment of the new Labour Government to “repeal and replace” the Legacy Act. In an oral statement on 4 December 2024 announcing the laying of the Proposed Remedial Order, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland set out that the Proposed Remedial Order would remedy all of the human rights deficiencies in the Legacy Act which had been identified by the High Court, as well as one of the issues identified by the Court of Appeal. The Secretary of State also indicated that the Government would introduce further primary legislation when parliamentary time allows to address the issue of inquests and other aspects of the Court of Appeal’s judgment. In parallel, the Government is seeking permission to appeal some aspects of the Court of Appeal’s judgment to the Supreme Court.

The Proposed Remedial Order

The Proposed Remedial Order seeks to remedy all of the incompatibilities found by the High Court in Northern Ireland and one of the incompatibilities found by the Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland by:

• Removing the provisions in the Legacy Act which set up the conditional immunity scheme and the prohibition on criminal enforcement action (see Article 2 of the Proposed Remedial Order);
• Removing the ban on using evidence provided to or produced by the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery in civil proceedings and inquests (see Article 3 of the Proposed Remedial Order);
• Removing the bar on new and existing civil actions relating to the Troubles (see Article 4 of the Proposed Remedial Order);
• Removing the provisions which sought to retrospectively validate defective interim custody orders and prevent civil claims for compensation in relation to them (see Article 5 of the Proposed Remedial Order);
• Making various amendments to other enactments which are consequential on the above changes (see Article 6 of the Proposed Remedial Order).

The Proposed Remedial Order does not seek to resolve the other incompatibilities found by the Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland, namely those relating to:

• Effective next of kin participation, including legal aid; and
• Disclosure of sensitive information.

This inquiry will look at the effects of street works on surface quality and maintenance costs, and how well local authorities are able to manage disruption for road and pavement users. This will include looking at the processes used for notification of works and issuing permits, and whether there are further opportunities to minimise the impact of street works.

Please read the call for evidence for more detail about this inquiry.

Building on the work on long-term refugees by the previous Committee, the Committee intends to look at the effectiveness of Official Development Assistance spending on a range of activity aimed at supporting displaced people across the globe. A major topic of the inquiry will be the FCDO’s consideration of civilians at the beginning of conflicts, and whether the appropriate support and assistance is offered. Furthermore, the Committee will investigate the effectiveness of ODA spending on support for people displaced by climate disasters. The Conflict, Security and Stability Fund, now replaced by the Integrated Security Fund, was intended to consider these issues, but questions remain about its effectiveness.

Integral to the Committee’s inquiry will be consideration of the drivers that force people to flee and what forms of early intervention work to prevent displacement. Once people become displaced, the Committee wants to examine what happens to them as they leave home and how their return home is facilitated. Across all of this, the Committee will consider whether what the UK Government is currently doing to keep displaced people safe is working.

The Committee is also interested in the value for money of ODA spent on housing displaced people within the UK. Finally, the Committee will evaluate Government progress against the recommendations made by the Committee in its May 2023 Report, “UK aid for refugee host countries”, including on Government support for host countries of long-term refugees, such as Jordan.

Join the conversation on X using @CommonsIDC

Background

In the King’s Speech in July 2024, the new Government announced its intention to “legislate to modernise the Mental Health Act so it is fit for the twenty first century”. The Mental Health Bill was subsequently introduced in the House of Lords on 6 November 2024 and Committee Stage in that House is scheduled to commence on 14 January 2025.

The Mental Health Bill is the product of years of preparatory work. In 2017, then-Prime Minister Theresa May commissioned an independent review of the Mental Health Act 1983. The review, chaired by Professor Sir Simon Wessely, published its report in December 2018. The Government subsequently brought forward a White Paper in 2021. Following a public consultation on that White Paper, the Government published a draft Mental Health Bill in June 2022. Parliament’s Joint Committee on the Draft Mental Health Bill carried out pre-legislative scrutiny of the Bill and published its findings in January 2023. These findings have informed the Mental Health Bill which is now before Parliament.

The Government’s proposals

The Bill aims to amend and reform a number of aspects of the Mental Health Act 1983. The Mental Health Act 1983 is the principal legislation governing the detention and compulsory treatment in England and Wales of people suffering from mental disorders.

The Government’s proposals in the Bill are wide-ranging, covering policies on multiple areas including:

• Autism and learning disabilities
• Grounds for detention
• Nominated persons
• Advanced choice documents
• Community treatment orders
• Changes to the statutory Codes of Practice

Role of the Joint Committee on Human Rights

The Joint Committee on Human Rights carries out scrutiny of legislation to ensure its compatibility with international and domestic human rights standards.

The Mental Health Bill deals with the detention and compulsory treatment of patients against their will. As such, it raises important issues concerning liberty and autonomy, as well as issues of public and personal safety.

The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) – which has been incorporated into domestic law through the Human Rights Act 1998 – includes a number of rights that may be engaged by the measures in the Mental Health Bill. For example:

• Article 5 ECHR guarantees the right to liberty and security. Article 5 states that “[n]o one shall be deprived of his liberty” except where it is in accordance with a “procedure prescribed by law” and one of the exemptions in the exhaustive list set out in Article 5. Article 5(1)(e) states that a person can be deprived on their liberty in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law where it is for the lawful detention of “persons of unsound mind”. Article 5 requires certain safeguards and procedures to be in place before a person can lawfully be deprived of their liberty.
• Article 8 ECHR guarantees the right to respect for private and family life. Article 8 is relevant to many aspects of mental health and medical treatment. For example, mental health is regarded as an indispensable precondition to effective enjoyment of the right to respect for private life. An individual’s right to refuse medical treatment falls within the scope of Article 8, including in the case of a mentally ill patient.
• Article 14 ECHR prohibits discrimination. Article 14 is not a stand-alone or general right against discrimination; the prohibition on discrimination only applies to discrimination in the enjoyment of the other rights set out in the Convention. It can therefore be relevant to arguments made under the other substantive rights, such as Articles 5 and 8.
• Articles 2 and 3 ECHR may also be relevant. Article 2 guarantees the right to life. The UK has responsibilities under Article 2 to protect the lives of vulnerable people in its care. Article 3 prohibits torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Where forced medical intervention is medically necessary and procedural safeguards are in place, it is usually not considered to amount to inhuman or degrading treatment. However, where medical necessity is lacking, medical treatment can be found to be incompatible with Article 3.

Other international human rights instruments may also be engaged by the provisions of the Bill, particularly the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

The Government has identified food security as a national security issue. The fairness in the food supply chain inquiry will provide consistent scrutiny of issues relating to the UK’s food security, the levels of support for domestic food production and the provision of affordable and healthy food.  

It will focus on producers, manufacturers and retailers, as well as other actors in the supply chain, and seek to engage with these stakeholders in formal calls for evidence, public evidence sessions, visits, engagement events and consultation.   

The Committee will call for evidence on a regular basis. The Committee will produce iterative and focused reports throughout the inquiry.   

Topics for scrutiny will include, but are not limited to:  

• structural relationships in the food supply chain;  

• national food strategy; 

• food security;   

• labour shortages in the supply chain; 

• resilience and length of supply chains and food systems;  

• public sector procurement of food;   

• food and animal welfare standards; 

• food labelling; 

• food prices and household food insecurity;   

• opportunities and challenges Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) present for the UK’s food sector; and  

• access to affordable and healthy food.   

This inquiry will engage the Committee’s cross-cutting work on the future of farming and supporting rural and coastal communities.  

Read the call for evidence here

Read the call for evidence for more detail about the inquiry.

It will explore how much control local authorities have over their own finances and whether this is enough to achieve financial sustainability.

Animal and plant diseases and pests have far-reaching impacts on the environment, agricultural and horticultural sectors, trade, human health, animal welfare, and the food that we eat.

The UK’s animal and plant biosecurity capability is in a period of significant change: the Animal and Plant Health Agency’s critical infrastructure – notably its Weybridge headquarters – is partway through a muti-billion pound transformation project, a new regime of sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) checks on goods from the EU is being implemented, and the UK is adapting to changed access to surveillance, people and skills. In this context, the Government has made ambitious animal welfare commitments and is seeking an SPS or veterinary agreement with the EU.

This inquiry will provide consistent scrutiny of ongoing and emerging issues and opportunities relating to animal and plant health. The Committee will call for evidence on a regular basis and produce iterative and focused reports throughout the inquiry.

Topics for scrutiny may include, but are not limited to:

• animal welfare;
• biosecurity at the border;
• implementation of the Border Target Operating Model;
• One Health approach to biosecurity;
• potential SPS agreement with the EU;
• skills and workforce planning in relevant professions (such as the veterinary sector);
• the impact of pests, diseases and biosecurity measures on farmers and the food supply chain;
• the resourcing and work of the Animal and Plant Health Agency;
• threats to UK forestry, including pests and diseases, and the risk of ecosystem collapse;
• threat-specific scrutiny, such as in response to an outbreak or an ongoing priority such as tackling antimicrobial resistance;
• UK Biological Security Strategy.

Read the ‘biosecurity at the border’ call for evidence here.

This inquiry will focus on how to achieve both short term stability and long-term sustainability for the SEND system to improve experiences and outcomes for children and young people.

Read the call for evidence

The call for evidence is also available in alternative formats via the links below:

• BSL Translation (video)
• EasyRead
• Audio description (audio file) 

Read our call for evidence for more detail about the inquiry and how to contribute your views

The inquiry will look into the supply of drugs into prisons, the involvement of organised criminal gangs in the distribution and trafficking of drugs in prisons, plus the use of technology including drones and mobile phones in facilitating the process. It will also analyse the effectiveness of current measures to tackle the issue, including drug testing and drug treatment for prisoners, substance-free wings and screening tools.

Today, most of the heavy industries that powered the Welsh economy during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries have gone. This inquiry will examine their environmental legacy, the economic impact of their decline, and what it means for Wales as it transitions to the green and digital economies.

Read the call for evidence to find out more about the inquiry: Call for Evidence - Committees - UK Parliament

This inquiry follows up on relevant aspects of the Scottish Affairs Committee’s previous work on this issue in the 2017-19 Parliament.

Read the terms of reference for more detail about the inquiry.

Asylum accommodation is primarily delivered by private providers through the Asylum Accommodation and Support Services Contracts (AASC). Home Office spending on asylum accommodation and support has increased significantly in recent years, from £739 million in 2019-20 to £4.7 billion in 2023-4.

The Home Affairs Committee has launched an inquiry into asylum accommodation. The inquiry will focus on how asylum accommodation is currently delivered, how the Home Office has managed the AAS contracts, and what lessons can be learned and applied to delivery of asylum accommodation in the future. The inquiry will also look at the impact that the current approach to delivering asylum accommodation has on local areas, and how the Home Office works with local partners, particularly local authorities.

The inquiry will consider how service users’ wider health and social needs can be addressed, including in employment and housing, and to understand what policy interventions are required to improve how these needs are met. As part of this inquiry, the Committee also wants to assess to what extent the Community Mental Health Framework is driving improvements in the delivery of more integrated, person-centred care. 

This inquiry is focussing on adults with severe mental health needs in particular, which includes but is not limited to people with bipolar disorder, schizophrenia and severe depression. The Committee recognises the scale of the challenge in children and young people’s mental health, and plans to do further work in this area in due course, building on its predecessor Committee’s 2021 inquiry. 

In line with the general practice of select committees, the Health and Social Care Committee is not able to take up individual cases or complaints. If you would like political support or advice you may wish to contact your local Member of Parliament.

On 4 December 2024, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland announced the Government’s next steps to ‘repeal and replace’ the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023. This inquiry will examine the Government’s outlined approach, which includes a commitment to restart civil cases and to legislate on inquests, information disclosure and the powers of the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (ICRIR). It will ask whether the Government’s proposals deliver for victims, survivors and their families, and also explore areas where the Government’s plans remain unclear, such as on its approach to reconciliation.

Read our call for evidence for more detail about the inquiry and how to contribute your views.

• A Public Body is required to perform a highly technical function
• It is required to perform activities that require political impartiality
• It needs to act independently to establish facts?

However, new ones continue to be created: the Government has launched several in its first months and plans for others have been announced.

Read the call for evidence for more detail about the inquiry.

This inquiry will examine how a planned, steady pipeline of projects and investments (including elements such as track enhancements, station upgrades, and rolling stock orders) could benefit the development of the railway, including by enabling the rail supply industry to plan ahead, giving confidence to potential investors and potentially reducing costs and other frictions. The Committee is also interested in how the development of a long-term project pipeline could help address skills shortages in the rail industry.

Read the call for evidence.

Read the call for evidence for more details about the inquiry