United Kingdom Internal Market Bill — House of Lords, 2020-11-18
Topic: Government Operations
George Foulkes (Labour, Centre-left): My Lords, I am very pleased once again to support the noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh. I want to speak briefly to three of the amendments. I will say first that the regulation-making powers in this Bill cover very significant areas. They are not minor matters. They really are important and that is why they need scrutiny. As I said earlier, the House of Lords does the work that we do best in scrutinising these issues I will deal first with Amendment 13. In Clause 8, the Secretary of State can under subsection (7) make regulations "to add, vary or to remove" a legitimate aim. That is key in defining a relevant requirement which indirectly discriminates. A legitimate aim is defined in subsection (6) as either "(a) the protection of the life or health of" human animals—oh, sorry, it is "humans, animals or plants," not human animals; well, human animals, other animals and plants. The second legitimate aim is "(b) the protection of public safety or security." Perhaps the Minister in his reply could shed light on which of these the Government would seek to amend in the future. That would be helpful The second amendment I want to refer to is Amendment 60. Particularly to my noble friend on the Front Bench, I commend this idea of the super-affirmative resolution. The noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh, said she has not yet got the support of the Labour Official Opposition. Once my colleagues scrutinise this in more detail, I am sure they will come round to supporting it. The super-affirmative resolution is described in Amendment 60. It provides for the laying of draft regulations and an explanatory statement by the Secretary of State to consult the devolved Administrations and to have regard to their representations and the representations of other persons, and to allow for additional time for parliamentary consideration. That is to "have regard to" these representations. The importance of the Secretary of State’s powers under the Bill requires better scrutiny than the affirmative or negative resolution procedure. We know that and know that they are not particularly helpful ways of scrutinising legislation The super-affirmative procedure as defined in this schedule provides better parliamentary scrutiny, allows engagement with the devolved Administrations and enables proper consultation. Holding the Government to account is important when such regulations are being made. I hope my noble friend will come round to the view that she will at least take it away and have a look and see if, at a later stage, all Labour Members can support the super-affirmative resolution Amendment 74 allows the scrutiny of statutory instruments containing regulations under the Bill in such a way as to allow for their urgent implementation, rather than following the super-affirmative procedure. There was concern that the super-affirmative procedure would take too much time, and this amendment provides for issues that need to be dealt with quickly. Regulations can be made under this provision only if the Secretary of State makes a declaration that he or she is "of the opinion that, by reason of urgency, it is necessary to make the regulations without a draft being approved under" the super-affirmative resolution procedure. The regulations will be limited in time, under proposed new subsection (4), to a period of 28 days, unless "the instrument is approved by a resolution of each House of Parliament." I hope that the Minister will consider the amendments carefully and I have great pleasure in supporting the noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh, in her amendments.