Select committee: Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee

Recommendation 14

Fourth Report - Parliamentary Scrutiny of the Government’s handling of Covid-19 Published 10 Sep 2020 Paragraph 64

Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee Responding to Covid-19 and the Coronavirus Act 2020 All items in this report Report on parliament.uk ↗ Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗

Recommendation (the committee's words)

The two-monthly reports on the status of non-devolved provisions, published under section 97, should be an important tool for scrutiny, but as currently structured, the reports do not give enough detail to enable Parliament, experts or the public to do this. The Committee recommends that the Government includes in future reports evidence-based arguments for why the provisions continue to be necessary and quantitative evidence on the impact of using those provisions. If the Government is going to extend the relevant temporary provisions Coronavirus Act after the six- month point, it should consult briefly on what additional information to include in the two-monthly reports and strive to include this as soon as possible. The Committee recommends that the Government includes in future reports evidence- based arguments for why the provisions continue to be necessary and quantitative evidence on the impact of using those provisions. If the Government is going to extend the relevant temporary provisions Coronavirus Act after the six-month point, it should consult briefly on what additional information to include in the two-monthly reports and strive to include this as soon as possible.

From: Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, Fourth Report - Parliamentary Scrutiny of the Government’s handling of Covid-19 (HC 377), paragraph 64, 10 September 2020

Government response

The government responded to the whole report on 9 December 2020 (deadline 10 November 2020).

Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.

The Government welcomes the Committee's report and responds point by point, largely defending its use of the Coronavirus Act and urgent procedures while committing to hold votes on regulations of national significance before they come into force where possible.

On the Civil Contingencies Act, the Government "still believes that was the right approach" of using the Coronavirus Act, citing prior parliamentary scrutiny and legal certainty, and states it believes there are "sufficient safeguards" in the Act.
On the urgent procedure, it says it "cannot hold up urgent regulations that are needed to control the virus and save lives", and describes use of the section 45R procedure as "lawful and rational".
It commits to give Parliament the opportunity, "where practicable", to debate regulations of national significance before they come into force, and says: "We intend to maintain this approach, whenever circumstances permit."
On thematic debates, it points to existing debates and the system of scrutiny in the Act. On two-monthly reports, it is "considering what other information would be helpful to include in future reports".

Read the government's response ↗ Report an error