Found: Letter from Lord Strathclyde, Chair of the Constitution Committee to Baroness Merron, Parliamentary under-Secretary

Found: evidence: The rule of law Wednesday 23 April 2025 10:30 am Watch the meeting Members present: Lord Strathclyde

Found: Letter from the Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood MP, Secretary of State for Justice to Lord Strathclyde, Chair

Found: Letter from Sarah Sackman KC MP, Minister for Courts and Legal Services to Lord Strathclyde, Chair of

Found: evidence: The rule of law Wednesday 2 April 2025 10.30 am Watch the meeting Members present: Lord Strathclyde

Found: evidence: The rule of law Wednesday 2 April 2025 10.30 am Watch the meeting Members present: Lord Strathclyde

Found: Letter from the Rt Hon Pat McFadden MP, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster to Lord Strathclyde, Chair

Found: evidence: The Rule of Law Wednesday 26 March 2025 10.30 am Watch the meeting Members present: Lord Strathclyde

Found: evidence: The Rule of Law Wednesday 26 March 2025 10.30 am Watch the meeting Members present: Lord Strathclyde

Found: Beith Baroness Laing of Elderslie Lord Bellamy Lord Murphy of Torfaen Lord Burnett of Maldon Lord Strathclyde

<p>Yes, sure. I certainly would welcome that proposal, and I'd welcome further discussions that we could have, Counsel General, also in the context of this Bill, between this stage and the next stage; I'm anticipating. I will be moving the amendment, because I think it's an important parliamentary principle, and I think that it would be good to have it voted on on that basis alone. But I anticipate that it's likely to fail at this stage, and I would appreciate the opportunity to continue the conversation.</p>
<p>I think it's important to recognise that, as I said, this amendment really reflects a growing body of opinion. It actually was—. The whole issue of amendable statutory instruments, of course, has been debated in Westminster for many decades now, but this particular proposal, I think, again, the procedure, I think, was first suggested through a report by Lord Goodlad in 2010; again in a report by Lord Strathclyde in 2015. It was recommended by the House of Lords Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee in the last Parliament, in Westminster. In the context of this statutory instruments Bill that actually went through its Committee Stage unamended on 14 March of this month, with wide-ranging support—it has to be said not on the Government's side, but it did go through unamended, and it obviously has passed its Second Reading as well—it was supported very vocally by Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, who has been a very high-profile adviser to the Government here. Serious people on the UK Government's governance project, chaired by Dominic Grieve, the former Attorney General, but also Baroness Hodge, Lord Neuberger, Jonathan Jones KC, very heavyweight people from the world of politics and constitutional law, proposed this in their report last year.</p>
<p>And the reason why people are proposing it in legislation, rather than through Standing Orders, as you said was suggested by the chief executive of the Hansard Society, is that it is such an important constitutional principle—it has become such an important constitutional principle—because of this lacuna, this vacuum of accountability. That is why people believe it needs to be enshrined in law, yes, put on a statutory basis, rather than simply done through a change in Standing Orders. So, that's why I will be moving this to a vote, because I think it—. You know, we have an opportunity here. I mean, there may be discussions—I'm sure there will be discussions—in the Business Committee, and I would welcome any discussions in any format. But here is an opportunity, with this Bill, for us to make the change, and I therefore, on that basis, will be moving it to a vote now, and we may, following further discussions, want to revisit this at Stage 3.</p>