Select committee: Business, Innovation, Science and Trade Committee
Third Special Report - UK accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership: Government Response to the Committee’s Second Report
Published 28 March 2024
Business, Innovation, Science and Trade Committee UK accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership Report on parliament.uk ↗
At a glance
The government's response
This document responds to Second Report - UK accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.
This is the government's response, published 28 March 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.
What the committee recommended
This is a government response document, so it has no recommendations of its own.