British Politics

Which can be deleted by regulations.

 

What would you suggest then?

 

It's not a single day as it follows on from the associated pieces of legislation that have been debated to buggery, and they do have alternatives, but over and above that, you've yet to provide a specific example of the scenario you seem to fear.

Can you give an example of how you see this being abused. Please bear in mind that these things have to meet the legal and constitutional laws and requirements.

 

Only with certain caveats, so it's not unfettered, and not unprecedented.

 

I already suggested a sunset clause on the power to make regulations.....

 

And I pointed you at the checks and balances in the Act, the law and the constitution that shows they exist.

You still haven't offered a specific scenario to give an example of how you see your fears playing out.

 

31 (2) Regulations under this section may make any provision that could be made by an Act of Parliament (including modifying this Act).
There is nothing I can see which stops the Government deleting all the caveats by regulation.

 

See previous post, which I have copied below, and also my comments on the Law and constitution.

So, I'll ask again, please give a specific example of how you see your fears playing out.

Clause 31.

272.Subsection (4) places a series of restrictions on the power. The power cannot be used to: impose or increase taxation; make retrospective provision; create a relevant criminal offence; amend or repeal key devolution legislation (with limited exceptions) or amend, repeal or revoke the Human Rights Act 1998 and any legislation made under that Act. 273.Subsection (5) provides for an exception to the restriction on making retrospective provision, by stating that this restriction does not apply if a regulation is made under this power in connection with the replacement and/or modification of any references to the Agreements, where this happens after a final legal revision. 274.The scrutiny procedures, and restrictions for devolved authorities, for this power are set out in Schedule 5.

https://www.not606.com/threads/british-politics.383388/page-742#post-14463868

 

Since the regulations are allowed to do anything that could be done by an Act of Parliament, I can't see how there are any additional constitutional requirements to be met.

As an example, They could make a regulation postponing an election.

 

The Commons approves the measures by 521 votes to 73 at its first stage in the Commons

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-55479851

 

No they couldn't. I've posted some of the limitations enabled by that Act, and also mentioned the Law and Constitution at least twice now.

 

None of the limitations would stop that. I'm very happy to be corrected if there is one that does.

 

See previous posts, one of which I have copied below, and also my comments on the Law and constitution which would mean it falls foul of other legislation, that would be flagged up by ALL parties as well as non-politicians.

The corona virus act enables the postponement, but under certain caveats. The fact it is mentioned in there shows that the Act in question is not 'unprecedented' and that fact it has been specifically accounted for in the Corona Virus Act shows it would need to be explicit in this Act.



So, I'll ask again, please give a specific example of how you see your fears playing out.

Clause 31.

272.Subsection (4) places a series of restrictions on the power. The power cannot be used to: impose or increase taxation; make retrospective provision; create a relevant criminal offence; amend or repeal key devolution legislation (with limited exceptions) or amend, repeal or revoke the Human Rights Act 1998 and any legislation made under that Act. 273.Subsection (5) provides for an exception to the restriction on making retrospective provision, by stating that this restriction does not apply if a regulation is made under this power in connection with the replacement and/or modification of any references to the Agreements, where this happens after a final legal revision. 274.The scrutiny procedures, and restrictions for devolved authorities, for this power are set out in Schedule 5.

https://www.not606.com/threads/british-politics.383388/page-742#post-14463868

 

It can't fall foul of 'the Law ....or other legislation' since the Bill expressly allows ALL legislation to be amended. Postponing an election isn't expressly forbidden by the exceptions so is therefore allowed. If the Law has been changed then what is anyone's recourse to challenge it?

 

How long?

 

The spirit of the legislation is a factor. It would fall foul of the law, and it would fall foul of the constitution. I edited my previous post to give an example of existing legislation where your fears could apply, but also added reasons why even then, they are unfounded.

"The corona virus act enables the postponement, but under certain caveats. The fact it is mentioned in there shows that the Act in question is not 'unprecedented' and that fact it has been specifically accounted for in the Corona Virus Act shows it would need to be explicit in this Act."

 

I would have thought a couple of months would be adequate to draft everything contemplated by Clause 29 and to make sure that there had been nothing omitted that would require Clause 31 to be so wide.

 

And as the EU effectively still need to vote on it, would they accept it. If not, then it's no deal. His fears are unfounded anyway.

 

If the EU are going to take a couple of months to ratify the deal then I dont see why the same couldn't apply to the UK.