re: #care cap in #HealthAndCareBill, procedural point is that gov is trying to make significant unforced policy change by introducing an am. to its own Bill *at report stage* i.e. *after* committee stage, when detailed #scrutiny is - in #HouseofCommons - supposed to happen. 1/6
#HealthAndCareBill committee stage finished 2/11, but gov only introduced its amendment 18/11. Gov may point, rightly, to fact that report stage is now 2 days (original plan was only 1). But this is no substitute for committee stage, when a committee can take expert evidence. 2/6
In these circs, when new policy is added at this stage, MPs ought to have the option of getting a Bill re-committed to the Public Bill Committee so the new content can be scrutinised in detail - Andrew Dilnot can give his evidence to MPs instead of/as well as @BBCr4today. 3/6
The gov's behaviour over its #HealthAndCareBill amendment is poor practice. It suggests a gov that's rushed ahead with legislation without getting the policy properly nailed down & internal conflicts about it squared away. 4/6
The gov's late introduction of its #HealthAndCareBill amendment is in some respects worse practice than, but is certainly of a piece with, its late introduction of its unforced amendment to the #ElectionsBill to change the electoral system for mayoral elections. 5/6
The gov at least introduced its #ElectionsBill am. when that Bill was still in committee - but it was still after 2nd Reading, when House is asked to agree to the principle of a Bill. All this is worth bearing in mind when gov members say they're committed to parly #scrutiny /end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Quick update thread on the status in Parliament of #LordFrost, as there have been developments this week & there'll be more tomorrow (Mon 15/3). #Brexit#NIProtocol 1/7
To recap: House of Lords rescinded Lord Frost's leave of absence, early, when he started his ministerial job on 1/3. There are Qs re: process (behind-the-scenes agreement not publicly-taken decision of whole House) but this allowed him to participate in HoL business, so: good. 2/
Since 1/3, Lord Frost has been answering, for the gov, relevant Qs in HoL as they've come up: on 4/1 on the space industry; & on 10/3 to a Private Notice Q (Lords' equivalent of an Urgent Q) on the Northern Ireland Protocol/Grace Period. 3/7
Ahead of publication of UK's objectives for its future relationship #negotiations with the EU, & of normal Thurs @HouseofCommons#BusinessQuestions this AM, a quick thread on some aspects of where we are on #Parliament side of things. 1/
1st, remember that, 'cos of way UK does treaties, gov is under no obligation to publish what it's publishing today. UK gov is under no obligation to tell Parl anything about treaties it's negotiating unless & until they need domestic implementing legislation +/or ratification. 2/
So, fact that gov is publishing a paper today, & doing so accompanied by both a written & oral statement to Parl, is good. It continues longstanding practice of UK gov publishing some kind of doc before start of negs with (pre-Brexit, the rest of) the EU. But... 3/
Leader of the House Jacob Rees-Mogg has told the HoC that the gov plans to get the Committee & all other Commons stages of the #WAB done in 3 days, 7-9 Jan. In other words, exactly the same no. of days as the previous House refused to do it in. 1/
Assuming the House gives the #WAB a 2nd Reading tomorrow, Fri 20/12, it will then be asked to approve a programme motion containing this 3-day timetable for Jan. (This, of course, is where the previous House said 'no' on 22 Oct.) 2/
On 8/1, HoC will also be asked to approve statutory motions under EU (Withdrawal) Act (arising 'cos of failure of 'meaningful vote' on 19/10) & EU (Withdrawal) No. 2 Act (which requires gov to make & HoC to approve a report on negs with the EU during A50 extension (!)) 3/
If people are just seeing news re: Beckett/Grieve ams tabled to so-called '#estimates', we flagged this summer's estimates process in a recent piece - see below. (Short thread) 1/
The Beckett/Grieve ams are tabled to the motions to authorise the 2019-20 spending of depts whose estimates have been chosen by the Backbench Business C'tee for separate debate & vote (this yr, 4 depts - DFID, DoE, DWP, HCLG). Motions & ams are here: 2/ publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cm…
The Beckett/Grieve ams seek to make parliamentary authorisation for these 4 depts' 2019-20 spending conditional on either the UK leaving the EU only with a Withdrawal Agreement, or approval by the Commons of a motion giving explicit approval for a #nodeal Brexit. 3/
People may be gathering that there's new anti-no-deal Brexitry afoot in the House of Commons tomorrow (Weds 12/6) so here's a quick thread re: what's going on in terms of HoC procedure in case it's useful. 1/
Tomorrow (Weds 12/6) in the HoC is a so-called Opposition Day. Normally, the government decides what the Commons will debate & vote on. On Opposition Days, an opposition party does. 2/
There have to be a certain no. of Opposition Days in each parliamentary session. The Official Opposition (currently, Labour) gets the vast majority of them, with some of the smaller opposition parties the rest. 3/
In voting on the #CooperBill, HoC has just agreed without division to amend the EU (Withdrawal) Act so that a future Statutory Instrument to amend 'exit day' in UK law would be subject to the negative scrutiny procedure, rather than the affirmative procedure as under original Act
Essentially, *if* #CooperBill becomes law with this amendment intact, this means a minister will be able to change 'exit day' under the EU(W)A unless either House objects. Currently, under the original EU(W)A, a minister can change 'exit day' only with the approval of both Houses
'Exit day' was already changed last week under the previous procedure, when the SI was got thru' both Houses in 3 days. But it'll need to be changed again next week. Fact that both Cooper & gov wanted to switch procedure suggests both realise time might be even tighter next week.