Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (Coronavirus) (Amendment of Schedule 10) (No. 2) Regulations 2021

Mark Fletcher Excerpts

Wednesday 27th October 2021 General Committees

[Chris Bryant (Rhondda) (Lab)]

I thought the Minister started admirably with the first half of his first sentence, when he said that it was a delight to sit under your chairmanship, Dr Huq. It then went all horribly wrong.

[Mark Fletcher (Bolsover) (Con)]

No it didn’t.

[Chris Bryant]

It did, because his next sentence was, “I beg to move that we approve this measure.” That is not what we are considering; we are only considering whether we have considered the matter.

I have a problem with secondary legislation, and it is an important point not least because we have considered so many pieces of secondary legislation in the past 18 months. I understand that there has been a pandemic but no other country in Europe, or anywhere else in the world, has used so much secondary legislation, which has gone through effectively on the nod, as we have in the UK. The problem with secondary legislation is that even if every single member of this Committee were to decide to vote against it, including the Minister, it would none the less go through, because we had “considered the matter” . It is just a fact that we would have considered the matter. I just wish that Ministers would get into their heads that we need a proper legislative process in this country. We have far too extensive use of secondary legislation and Henry VIII powers and it is time that we rolled back to legislating properly.

I specifically asked the Minister how he knows whether this is the right thing to do. Of course, the regulations say:

“Further to section 22(1) of that Act, the Secretary of State has considered the effect of these Regulations on persons likely to be affected by them.”

However, he just said that he has no idea whether the process we have been through has been useful. He thinks it might have been, but he does not know—he has no evidence to bring before us.

The regulations continue:

“Further to section 22(2) of that Act, the Secretary of State is satisfied that…the need for the provision made by these Regulations is urgent”.

The Minister has not proved that to the Committee in any shape or form. They then say that

“the provision made by these Regulations is proportionate to the purpose for which it is made”.

Again, he cannot assert that because he has no evidence on which the regulations are based.

The Minister referred to the end of covid and the Government successfully taking us through the process as if, in July, liberty day—whatever the Prime Minister called it—suddenly meant that we were all free and there was no need for any further restrictions. That we now have the highest level of infections of any country in Europe and the highest number of deaths due to covid should suggest to the Government that we are not quite through this yet. The Minister might say, “That’s one of the reasons why we still brought forward this legislation,” and that is undoubtedly why most of us would not want to oppose it, but I have important questions for him.

Why are the regulations extending the relevant period only to 31 March 2022? Is there a reason, or is it just sticking a finger in the air and saying, “Well, that feels like a sensible date”? I note that that is a few days short of the normal financial year—certainly the tax year. I wonder whether that is the right date.

In the schedule that will become the new schedule 10 to the Act, paragraph (2)(c) refers to “excluded debt”. It may be that I am being stupid and that I do not know the legislation as well as I should, but will the Minister tell us what “excluded debt” is? Finally, and again this may be because I am stupid and do not understand—I thought that might unite the Committee—I note that the territorial extent of the regulations is England, Wales and Scotland. Why is Northern Ireland not included? Of course, we have considered the regulations, but we are not approving them.