Parliamentary scrutiny of treaties inquiry

Published 8 July 2019.

The Government notes the Committee's report and considers CRaG "appropriate", while acknowledging the request for better information sharing and committing to engage with whatever parliamentary scrutiny structures the Houses implement.

• On a treaty committee, it says establishing structures to scrutinise treaties "is a matter for Parliament itself", and commits to engage "in a constructive way" with any committee tasked with scrutinising treaties.
• It does not agree that it should operate on "a presumption of transparency" for all treaty negotiations, citing the need to balance competing public interests, but sees merit in sharing broad information at the start of negotiations "in many cases", at its discretion.
• On debates, where a scrutiny committee raises serious concerns and recommends a debate within CRaG processes, it "will endeavour to ensure parliamentary time is found". On extending the 21 sitting day period, it will consider any request "where there are compelling reasons, and sufficient time".
• It is "committed to ensuring the quality of Explanatory Memoranda is improved" and commits officials to engage with committee clerks; the Foreign and Commonwealth Office "will also strengthen its role" in offering guidance to departments.

Read the government's response ↗ Report an error