Source · Select Committees · Justice Committee
Recommendation 19
19
Accepted in Part
Paragraph: 71
Mandate consultation and consent for all future Permissive Extent Clauses impacting Crown Dependencies.
Recommendation
The inclusion of a Permissive Extent Clause (PEC) in the Fisheries Bill was extremely regrettable and contrary to the constitutional relationship. We do not agree with the Government’s assertion that it was a “legitimate act” and “soundly within the constitutional relationship”, but rather consider it to have been a serious interference in long-established constitutional principles for short-term political reasons. We expect that the usual approach—mandated in the Ministry of Justice’s own guidance—of consultation and consent with regards to all future PECs will now prevail.
Government Response Summary
The government agrees that consultation with Crown Dependencies should occur before including a Permissive Extent Clause (PEC) in legislation. However, they reject the Committee's criticism of the PEC in the Fisheries Act 2020 and maintain that PECs do not constitute legislating for Crown Dependencies, reserving the right to use them in exceptional circumstances, particularly for international obligations, without prior agreement.
Paragraph Reference:
71
Government Response
Accepted in Part
HM Government
Accepted in Part
54. The Government agrees with the Committee that the Government should consult the Crown Dependencies in advance of including a PEC in any legislation that may affect them. 55. The inclusion of a PEC in UK legislation does not constitute legislating for the Crown Dependencies as the mere fact of a PEC’s inclusion does not have a material effect in the Crown Dependencies. A PEC is a mechanism that enables UK provisions to be extended to the Crown Dependencies in the future if either a Crown Dependency or, in exceptional circumstances, the UK thinks it necessary. 56. Where a bill covers areas wholly within the Crown Dependencies’ domestic responsibilities, a PEC would not be included in the bill without the Crown Dependencies’ agreement, save in exceptional circumstances. However, in circumstances where a bill engages the UK’s constitutional responsibilities for the Crown Dependencies, including their defence and international relations, or in circumstances where the Crown Dependencies may need to participate in UK-regulated activities, the inclusion of a PEC in a bill where the UK deems a PEC to be necessary does not require the Crown Dependencies’ agreement. 57. The Government has a responsibility to make sure it can fulfil its international obligations, which may require the ability to extend UK legislation to the Crown Dependencies in future, such as, though not exclusively, in the event of an emerging international crisis where the UK feels it may be more expedient to adopt a unified approach across the UK and the Crown Dependencies, subject to consultation with the Crown Dependencies at the time. 58. In the case of the Fisheries Act 2020, the then Government decided that a PEC was required to provide an effective mechanism to ensure the Crown Dependencies comply with the international obligations binding on them and on the UK. Any breach of international fisheries obligations could have serious consequences for both the UK and the Crown Dependencies’ fishing industries. We therefore do not agree that the inclusion of a PEC in the Fisheries Act 2020 was contrary to the constitutional relationship.