Chamber and committees

Absolutely. We have heard evidence from witnesses that it might be appropriate to have some form of guidance in place to say when it would be suitable and acceptable to use Henry VIII powers—which is what we are calling them just now—regardless of the name. Would that be helpful to the Government? If so, that is great, but if not, why not?

From the evidence that we are taking, the purpose would be to ensure effective scrutiny, and that would be—

Okay—accepted. Moving on, how do you think the use of framework legislation affects the balance of power between the executive and the legislature?

Yes. Do you think that there is concern that the broad powers in some framework legislation could be used by future ministers in a way that was not envisaged when the legislation first came into force?

I appreciate the example that you have given. I will delve a little bit, as the committee has taken evidence that suggests that the function of the power is more significant than its form—and I would probably add its name to that.

Should the legislature be concerned with Henry VIII powers just because they allow changes to be made to primary legislation by secondary legislation, or should we be more focused on the scope and significance of those changes?

I was just interested to hear on what basis you came to that conclusion.

Some witnesses suggested that guidance on framework legislation should be put in place. We have highlighted that there is no definition, and you have come back on that. Should there be guidance from the legislature to the executive on when framework legislation may be appropriately introduced? Would any guidance that we put forward be a sort of halfway house, so to speak?

You say that it would be an unhelpful process, but equally, your evidence just highlighted the fact that what started off as a non-framework bill ended up with additional secondary legislation-making powers by the end of the bill process. We do not have that definition and, because it is not there, the process is such that bills morph all the time and can become what could be seen as framework bills as they go through the process.

You say that putting guidance in place would not be helpful. I have a concern about that, which I will try to frame right way. If we took a view on whether legislation should be framework legislation, what would the Government’s view be on establishing principles to provide committees such as the DPLR Committee with clear means by which to assess and report on whether a bill is framework in nature, especially since they morph?

Okay. Thank you.

My last questions, which are a little subset on their own, are on Henry VIII powers. When is it considered appropriate to include a Henry VIII power?

Excellent. That is helpful.

What is your view on the scope of the powers being included in primary legislation? Specifically, has the scope of Henry VIII powers been widely used in recent times? We have heard evidence that there is a danger that having Henry VIII powers of particularly wide scope can become a bit of a habit and that those have been accepted in some instances. Do you recognise that?