Source · Select Committees · Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee
Recommendation 11
11
Rejected
Paragraph: 64
Mandate explicit active House of Commons approval vote for all treaties before ratification.
Recommendation
The explicit, active approval of the House of Commons should be a requirement for all treaties (legally binding international agreements) to be allowed to proceed to ratification or for it to be otherwise indicated that the UK gives consent to be bound by an international instrument. This means that the Government should not be able to proceed to ratify or otherwise indicate consent to be bound by a treaty until approval has been signified by a vote in the House of Commons.
Government Response Summary
The Government rejects the recommendation for explicit House of Commons approval for all treaties, arguing that Part 2 of CRaG already strikes an appropriate balance and that giving Parliament binding votes would undermine the Royal Prerogative and treaty-making flexibility. It asserts Parliament already possesses sufficient scrutiny mechanisms.
Paragraph Reference:
64
Government Response
Rejected
HM Government
Rejected
Disagree. The Government does not accept the Committee’s conclusion that Parliament requires further powers to scrutinise the Government’s exercise of Royal Prerogative powers in its treaty making. Part 2 of CRaG strikes the appropriate balance. When scrutinising a treaty subject to CRaG, either House may object to its ratification. Parliamentary approval of treaties is more commonly found in monist States, where treaties automatically become part of domestic law. UK practice is consistent with that of other dualist states such as Canada, Australia and New Zealand – in some respects the Government’s commitments to Parliament go beyond what is provided in other systems. The current practice therefore provides the flexibility, the necessity of which the Committee has recognised, to ensure that Government can continue the important business of doing deals in the national interest while providing a mechanism for Parliament to oppose if the strength of feeling is there. Significantly, the House of Commons has never resolved against ratification using the power it already has under CRaG. To give Parliament binding votes – or vetoes – over treaties would be to fundamentally undermine the Royal Prerogative of treaty making and limit the flexibility needed to negotiate and enter into the deals that will best serve UK interests. As the Committee has noted, the government is accountable to Parliament and holds office by virtue of its ability to command the confidence of the elected House of Commons. The consequence of these principles is not that further legislation is required. Rather, it is that Parliament has the mechanisms to properly scrutinise the Government’s treaty making powers already.