Lords committees: Strathclyde Review recommendations would benefit government at the expense of Parliament

The House of Lords Constitution Committee today published its report in response to the Strathclyde Review, alongside a report from the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee (DPRRC).

The Strathclyde Review was set up by the government when the House of Lords refused to approve draft regulations relating to significant changes to tax credits. Both reports are highly critical of the review.

The Constitution Committee states that the review is “not a proper basis for determining constitutional change” and that proceeding with changes to Parliament’s role based on the Review “will only damage Parliament’s role and reputation”.

Both reports are also critical of how delegated legislation is increasingly being used to address issues of principle and policy, rather than to manage administrative and technical changes.

The committees recommend that further consideration, by both houses, of the delegated legislation process in its entirety should take place before the government moves forward on this issue.

Professor Stephen Tierney, director of the Edinburgh Centre for Constitutional Law and legal adviser to the Constitution Committee told Scottish Legal News: “Both of these reports argue that the real issue at stake is not the power of the House of Lords vis-à-vis the Commons, but rather the effectiveness of Parliament as a whole in its scrutinizing and reviewing functions.

“The reports raise significant questions relating to executive dominance of parliamentary procedure.”