Published 13 July 2023.
Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.
The government agrees that overly large bills can impede scrutiny but considers that this Bill "strikes an appropriate balance between scale and manageability", and it explains its position on devolution, delegated powers and other matters raised by the Committee.
- On size, the government agrees that "overly large bills can impede proper scrutiny" but would be "wary of suggesting" there can usefully be an "upper limit", and does not feel it "entirely fair" to call the Bill a 'Christmas Tree' Bill.
- On devolution in England, it "wholeheartedly" agrees there must be a careful balance between local variation and added complexity, and considers the Bill's framework provides "a common architecture for devolution deals".
- On the Sewel Convention, it does "not consider the legislative consent process to be engaged" for Part 1. It has tabled amendments for Report stage on consulting devolved authorities (Part 1) and giving devolved administrations concurrent powers (Part 6).
- On common frameworks, it "disagrees with the view of the Committee" that Part 6 could undermine consensus-seeking and joint working. On planning law, it has set out amendments limiting the power's use and capping relief at "a maximum of one year".
Read the government's response ↗
Report an error