Financial Services (Miscellaneous) (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 — House of Lords, 2019-03-21
Topic: Government Operations
Denis Tunnicliffe (Labour, Centre-left): My Lords, I will speak mostly about the first SI, if only to moan a bit. Paragraph 3.6 of the Explanatory Memorandum says that the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee, "noted that the legislation proposed to be amended by the instrument includes: four Acts of Parliament; seven ‘pre-EU Exit’ statutory instruments; 12 ‘EU Exit’ statutory instruments that have been considered by the House during the last six months; and several items of retained EU legislation" As far as I can tell, there are 36 amendments in this SI which have no themes or interrelationship. To get a feel for how difficult it is to work on the SI, paragraph 2.6 of the Explanatory Memorandum gives up almost altogether and says: "Part 3 also makes minor technical amendments to correct the following financial services EU exit instruments. Further information on these instruments can be found in the EMs accompanying the instruments on legislation.gov.uk" If I threw all that in, it would take hours. Indeed, if one devoted just 10 minutes’ attention to each amendment, it would take six hours to read the thing The Minister said, rather grandly, that this had been considered by the House of Commons. I too noted that fact and leapt at the Official Report to give me some help. It told me that the Commons committee sat at 6 pm —that is quite keen—but adjourned at 6.11 pm, having completed its work. Members devoted 11 minutes to this SI. I am sure that, due to their natural brilliance, they scrutinised it fully, but I am rather slower than that There is a real problem of how we get proper scrutiny. I sought help from the Civil Service, as one is invited to by the Explanatory Memorandum. As I understand it, the amendments fall into three groups. One group corrects errors; I would value knowing how many of the 36 are error corrections. Another group makes previous SIs compatible with those created subsequently by other departments. So we have one bit of government making SIs that create complications in another; it is a bit brave to consider creating complications in Treasury SIs The third group comes from a review of the previous legislation. One worries about that until turning again to the Explanatory Memorandum. The Treasury has been consistent and kept paragraphs 7.1 to 7.8 identical in all its 50 SIs. Paragraph 7.4 says that these SIs, "are not intended to make policy changes, other than to reflect the UK’s new position outside the EU, and to smooth the transition to the situation" Therefore, I want a categorical assurance that in these 36 amendments there is no new policy. If there is new policy hidden among them, will the Minister tell me what that new policy is Turning to the second instrument, I found almost the opposite to the noble Baroness, Lady Kramer. Not that I am suggesting that what she said was not valid, but I thought this was a commendable Explanatory Memorandum. It is a stand-alone document that one could understand and it seemed that it was doing what the SI should do. In other words, it was dealing with inevitable consequences, so I am content with it. I think the essence of what the noble Baroness was saying is that here is yet another bad consequence of leaving the European Union, and to that extent I totally agree with her.