Source · Select Committees · Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee
Recommendation 8
8
Paragraph: 49
The current system of Parliamentary scrutiny in relation to lockdown regulations is not satisfactory.
Conclusion
The current system of Parliamentary scrutiny in relation to lockdown regulations is not satisfactory. The fact that this legislation, which contains stark restrictions on people’s civil liberties, is not amendable by Members, made under the urgent procedure and therefore without parliamentary scrutiny or effective oversight, coupled with the extremely quick passing of the Coronavirus Act means the framework Parliamentary scrutiny of the Government’s handling of COVID-19 is inadequate.
Paragraph Reference:
49
Government Response
Not Addressed
HM Government
Not Addressed
The Government notes the Committee’s concerns. There has been a significant amount of COVID-19 legislation in a relatively short space of time, so to aid accessibility all COVID-19 legislation has been collated at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/coronavirus. More widely, we would like to reassure the Committee that there will continue to be a wide range of opportunities for Members to hold the Government to account for the handling of the Coronavirus pandemic, including general debates and oral statements in the usual way. Ministers have listened carefully to Members’ contributions made in debates on regulations, and although that has not—as unfortunately it could not—resulted in any amendment to the set of regulations at issue, that input is taken into consideration as the policy has evolved over time. The flexibility shown on all sides of the House in adapting procedures and processes to fit these changing circumstances has been vital in achieving an optimal balance between speed and scrutiny. During the six-month review debate (30th September 2020) on the Coronavirus Act, it became clear that Members were not unduly concerned by the use of regulation making