Select committee: Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee

Recommendation 31

Second Report - Parliamentary Scrutiny of International Agreements in the 21st century Published 29 Jan 2024 Paragraph 142

Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee The Scrutiny of International Treaties and other international agreements in the 21st century All items in this report Report on parliament.uk ↗ Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗

Recommendation (the committee's words)

We are encouraged by the evidence we received on the regular and effective discussion and consultation between both the Ministry of Justice and Crown Dependencies and the FCDO and the Overseas Territories with regard to treaties that could be extended to them. We call on the Government to ensure that it notifies the new sifting committee - as well as Justice Committee and Foreign Affairs Committee where appropriate - when it is in discussion with Crown Dependencies or Overseas Territories on the potential extension of treaties to them when negotiating an agreement on their behalf, or when it has provided a letter of entrustment.

From: Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, Second Report - Parliamentary Scrutiny of International Agreements in the 21st century (HC 204), paragraph 142, 29 January 2024

Government response

The government responded to the whole report on 18 April 2024 (deadline 29 March 2024).

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

The government partially agrees with some conclusions but does not accept that the existing framework for treaty scrutiny is insufficient, and disagrees with the recommendation that Parliament must approve all treaties.

On the recommended active approval process, the government says it "does not accept" that Parliament requires further powers and that Part 2 of CRaG "strikes the appropriate balance", so "no legislative changes are required".
It disagrees with a central repository for non-legally binding instruments, calling it "impractical", but says it "will update its published guidance to encourage consistency and transparency".
It accepts the recommendation to keep providing an explanatory memorandum alongside treaties laid under CRaG, and says it will keep the information provided "in review".
On negotiating mandates, it says a working practices agreement is "neither necessary nor appropriate", though it remains "committed to the principles of transparency and positive engagement" while retaining discretion over information shared.

Read the government's response ↗ Report an error