As mentioned in
an earlier blog New
restrictive regulations on freedom of information the government is
planning to restrict your ability to find out what they are doing by making
changes to the Freedom of Information Act and the Data Protection Act.
Passed by
Parliament back in October the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006(LRR
Act) is being used as the vehicle for slipping in this restriction whilst MP’s
are on their Easter break.
The tool being
used is a Statutory Instrument, and outlined below are the relevant parts of
the LRR Act that will allow the Department for Constitutional Affairs to push
this through, even though their own ‘consultation committee’ recommended
against it, and MP’s asked them not to progress it via an Early Day Motion last
year.
Section
1 sets out a broad power for Ministers to make any provision they consider would serve the purpose of removing or reducing a burden or reducing the
overall burdens of any person affected by a piece of legislation. A
burden means any of the following:
- A financial cost,
- An administrative inconvenience,
- An obstacle to efficiency, productivity or
profitability, - A sanction, criminal or otherwise, which
affects the carrying out of a lawful activity.
One
can only assume here that asking the Government to explain itself by making
requests under the Freedom of Information Act is a burden to them, and is
obviously an obstacle to their efficiency and productivity.
Section
4 restricts the power to delegate legislative functions such that they can only
be delegated to government ministers, people who have had legislative power
delegated to them in prior legislation or office holders or bodies created by
the orders. It also restricts such delegation of legislative powers such that
they have to be exercised via statutory instrument if they are delegated or conferred
on ministers of the crown.
Note that an order under this
LRR Act can confer legislating powers
on office holders or bodies created by the order itself, thus cutting
Parliament out of the loop completely.
Sections
12 to 18 set out the procedure to be followed. The Minister must first consult
with various people he considers appropriate (this was done in secret), and
then lay out a draft order in both Houses of Parliament with an explanatory
document and recommendation for which of the following procedures to following:
- The negative procedure. Parliament has 40
days to object before the order is made, either by one House passing a
resolution against it or for a committee of either House to recommend
rejecting it, whereupon it will fall unless the same House rejects the
recommendation. The committee can only report with its recommendation
after 30 days and before 40 days have passed. - The affirmative procedure. Parliament has
40 days to approve the order in both Houses. A committee of either House
can, after 30 days and before 40 days, recommend abandoning the order in
which case a resolution rejecting the recommendation is required. - The super-affirmative procedure. Parliament
has 60 days to approve the order, or recommend changes. The Minister can
enact a revised order if Parliament approves, or the original order if
Parliament approves.
Note that the Minister can
recommend a procedure but either House can insist on a more stringent
procedure, e.g. if the Minister recommends the negative procedure, either House
can insist on the affirmative procedure or the super-affirmative procedure. If
he recommends the affirmative procedure they can insist on the
super-affirmative procedure. 30 days are allowed for each House to change the
procedure otherwise the Minister’s recommendation applies.
Also, orders cannot be
amended by Parliament, only accepted or rejected, and since the MP’s will
all be on Easter Break, a non response will default to an acceptance.
Sneaky
eh..
A
fuller explanation of the LRR rules can be found here on the Magna
Carta Plus News website.
