Draft Statutory Auditors, Third Country Auditors and International Accounting Standards (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

Draft Statutory Auditors, Third Country Auditors and International Accounting Standards (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019

Sheryll Murray Excerpts
Monday 9th September 2019

(4 years, 7 months ago)

General Committees
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Peter Grant Portrait Peter Grant
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman agrees with some of the points I am making. As he helpfully points out, if Government Members were all that interested in going through the regulations in fine detail, perhaps they should have asked professionals in the various accounting and auditing institutions before the Committee. I have no doubt that Government Members will rise to speak in support of the regulations. When they do so, perhaps they will tell the Committee what could have gone disastrously wrong if they had taken the time to get the policy right on their third attempt, and asked the statutory accounting and audit bodies what the regulations would do.

Sheryll Murray Portrait Mrs Sheryll Murray (South East Cornwall) (Con)
- Hansard - -

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman could help me by telling us, as my hon. Friend the Member for Ochil and South Perthshire asked him to do, which specific parts of the regulations he objects to.

Peter Grant Portrait Peter Grant
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It has already been pointed out. As I said, if there has not been consultation with the bodies whose purpose it is to regulate the profession, why would the Government ask a group of lay people to agree the regulations?

Sheryll Murray Portrait Mrs Murray
- Hansard - -

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Peter Grant Portrait Peter Grant
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

No, I will not give way again. The hon. Lady will get a chance to speak if she wishes. I would be interested to know why the Government did not have that consultation. Why are they making significant changes to policy during a process that the House agreed could be used to make technical, consequential, minor and non-controversial changes, of which there would need to be millions to get us even vaguely ready for 31 October? Why are they trying to put in much more significant and substantive changes that should have been tested on the Floor of the House before they passed into law?