Concerns about the Legislative & Regulatory Reform Bill (Rutland & Melton Liberal Democrats)

Rutland & Melton Liberal Democrats <info@rutlandlibdems.org.uk>

Concerns about the Legislative & Regulatory Reform Bill

April 6, 2006 8:33 AM

There is genuine concern amongst Liberal Democrats about the new Legislative & Regulatory Reform Bill which has the potential to lead to the end of democracy in Britain.

The bill appears to be fairly technical but it could have a far-reaching effect. It is designed, in the Government's words, "to make it quicker and easier to tackle unnecessary or over-complicated regulation", so reducing 'red tape' for business, the public and voluntary organisations. Specifically the Bill's purpose is to enable a greater number of legislative changes to be delivered by Regulatory Reform Order (RRO), rather than primary legislation (an Act of Parliament). This includes making the implementation of recommendations from the Law Commission, the Scottish Law Commission and the Northern Ireland Law Commission easier and reducing the amount of domestic legislation required to implement EU directives in the UK.

To achieve this, the Bill enables Ministers to alter pretty much any law passed by Parliament. The only limitations are that new crimes cannot be created if the penalty is greater than two years in prison and that it cannot increase taxation. But any other law can be changed, no matter how important.

There would also be the power to alter the bill itself which is perhaps the most worrying aspect.

The Liberal Democrats are broadly in favour of a reduction in regulation. An accelerated method for bringing Law Commission proposals into law must also be welcomed. However, this Bill would remove parliamentary scrutiny and place a dangerous amount of power in the hands of the executive. The Liberal Democrats are seeking to radically amend Part 1 of the Bill to ensure that Parliament maintains the power to scrutinise legislation and regulations. Without these radical changes the Bill will be completely unacceptable to us.

The Liberal Democrats did not oppose the Bill at its second reading in the Commons. Spokesman David Heath MP explained this was "because we need a Bill that does the things that this Bill claims to intend to do. I also believe that this Bill is capable of redemption, but if substantial changes are not made to part 1, either in Committee or on Report, there is no way that I could advise my right hon. and hon. Friends to support the Bill on Third Reading. Moreover, I am absolutely confident that it would be amended beyond recognition in another place [the House of Lords] if it remained in its present state."