Select committee: Business, Innovation, Science and Trade Committee

Recommendation 1

Second Report - UK accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership Published 19 Feb 2024 Paragraph 11 Addressed to Department for Business and Trade

Business, Innovation, Science and Trade Committee UK accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership All items in this report Report on parliament.uk ↗ Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗

Recommendation (the committee's words)

The terms of UK accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership raise contentious issues. We recommend that during the 21-day scrutiny period under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010, the Government facilitate a debate on the Floor of the House on a substantive motion on the ratification of UK accession to the Agreement. The Secretary of State for Business and Trade should write to the Leader of the House, setting out the case for holding such a debate in Government time.

From: Business, Innovation, Science and Trade Committee, Second Report - UK accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (HC 483), paragraph 11, 19 February 2024

Government response

The government responded to the whole report on 28 March 2024 (deadline 19 April 2024).

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

The government's response sets out why it declines to guarantee a substantive debate or to prepare a revised impact assessment, and describes the support it is providing to help UK businesses use the agreement.

On a substantive debate on ratification, the government will "always seek to accommodate a debate" where a request is made "in a timely manner and subject to Parliamentary time". It says a general debate is the appropriate mechanism.
It does not commit to guaranteed substantive debates under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 (CRaG), saying this would "fundamentally alter the nature of the scrutiny framework, undermine the Royal Prerogative, and remove flexibility".
It does not propose to prepare a revised impact assessment, stating that the existing one "continues to be fit for purpose" and that a revised version would not contain "substantially more recent data nor improvements to the methodology".
The Department has "committed to publishing a comprehensive ex-post evaluation report for CPTPP accession within 5 years of entry into force" of the CPTPP for the UK.

Read the government's response ↗ Report an error