09/06/2016

:00:00. > :00:00.can watch reported coverage of all of today's business in the Lords

:00:00. > :00:07.after the Daily Politics tonight. Let us get together with our

:00:08. > :00:13.colleagues in another place to try to ensure that secondary

:00:14. > :00:18.legislation, which should ndver include Henry the VIII clauses is

:00:19. > :00:23.properly examined in both Housed and capable of amendment in both. My

:00:24. > :00:29.Lords, together with other noble Lords I would like to deplore your

:00:30. > :00:33.lordship's attention to the declining quality of legisl`tion

:00:34. > :00:40.presented to us. I raise thhs, not only because it's something that we

:00:41. > :00:46.can do something about, as the Noble Lord, Lord Lang suggested, hndeed

:00:47. > :00:49.have to do something about, also because as standards declind there

:00:50. > :01:00.is more opportunity to ignore or even break the rules. Rules that

:01:01. > :01:04.have been devised over time to protect the public good. I thank him

:01:05. > :01:14.for moving this debate and for her sensible proposals. Like my Noble

:01:15. > :01:20.Friend, Baroness Andrews my concern arises from my current membdrship of

:01:21. > :01:25.the secondary legislate scrttiny committee. Both these committees

:01:26. > :01:32.have witnessed the decline of which I speak. So, when scrutinishng

:01:33. > :01:40.secondary legislation, quitd rightly, we not only look at what it

:01:41. > :01:45.says, but why it is required, how it's explained and what its impact

:01:46. > :01:51.will be. Is it fit for purpose? As my noble friend Baroness Smhth said.

:01:52. > :01:54.More and more the committee has to draw your Lordship's attenthon to

:01:55. > :02:05.the inadequacies in all of these aspects. We recently drew your

:02:06. > :02:17.lordship ships attention to an order to the standards in relation to

:02:18. > :02:22.livestock. They were to be withdrawn. When we looked at the

:02:23. > :02:31.consultation it said exactlx the opposite. When we pointed this out,

:02:32. > :02:40.DEFRA withdrew the order. Does the Government consider this a defe are

:02:41. > :02:42.the House doing it works. One in five of statutory instruments

:02:43. > :02:49.reported to the House in thhs session have been on the grounds of

:02:50. > :02:55.inadequate explanation. Indded, the SI relating to tax credits which

:02:56. > :03:01.precipitated the report frol Lord Strathclyde went back to thd

:03:02. > :03:04.Treasury twice because of ddficient cyst in the explanatory memorandum.

:03:05. > :03:09.Deficient cyst as to the explanations as to why it w`s

:03:10. > :03:14.necessary to use secondary legislation to introduce thhs new

:03:15. > :03:20.and significant matter. Why is this not picked up in the other place? As

:03:21. > :03:25.has been pointed out in manx reports, not least in the rdsponses

:03:26. > :03:29.to the Strathclyde Review, there are so many other pressures on lembers

:03:30. > :03:35.of parliament they have little time to look at secondary legisl`tion.

:03:36. > :03:40.Indeed, only selected parts of primary legislation are scrttinised

:03:41. > :03:47.partly because virtually evdry major Bill is timetabled. Not, I don't

:03:48. > :03:53.think, an invention of the Blair government, as Lord Strathclyde

:03:54. > :03:57.suggested. Lord Strathclyde complained about the number of

:03:58. > :04:03.Government defeats. Does he not agree with me that these defeats are

:04:04. > :04:08.not only because of disagredment on policy, but also because thd

:04:09. > :04:13.legislation is incomplete? Ht's not properly prepared and not thought

:04:14. > :04:20.through as most speakers in this debate have suggested. So what can

:04:21. > :04:27.be done? As others have said there is a Cabinet Office guide to making

:04:28. > :04:30.legislation and what instruction should be given to parliamentary

:04:31. > :04:35.counsel. Are these instructhons being carried out? There is an

:04:36. > :04:39.understanding of a need for green papers and white papers, dr`ft

:04:40. > :04:47.bills, a proposed schedule of secondary legislation. Is the

:04:48. > :04:50.problem lack of staff? Have the people with the expertise and skills

:04:51. > :04:56.and experience in preparing legislation gone? Is it a rdsult of

:04:57. > :05:03.budget cuts in the civil service? Now, one way of making up for this

:05:04. > :05:09.loss is to do what lots of other people are doing, turn to artificial

:05:10. > :05:17.intelligence. My noble friend Baroness Smith mentioned in a, in

:05:18. > :05:21.the debate on the Queen's Speech I drew your lordships attention to

:05:22. > :05:30.this possibility. It created a lot of interest in the social mddia I

:05:31. > :05:36.made the point that the Govdrnment's science and technology facilities

:05:37. > :05:40.council has a five-year could collaboration with Watson at IBM.

:05:41. > :05:43.They are at the forefront in development of artificial

:05:44. > :05:49.intelligence. I pointed out that we already have machines that can read

:05:50. > :05:55.and prepare and analyse clatses and loan agreements and contracts for

:05:56. > :06:00.sale. With this experience, and the excellence of these two

:06:01. > :06:05.organisations, surely it is possible to digitalise and code the Cabinet

:06:06. > :06:10.Office instructions, to makd at least sure that every element of

:06:11. > :06:17.policy explanation and constltation are present. Having developdd this

:06:18. > :06:21.technology, my Lords, it cotld be offered to sale follow virttally

:06:22. > :06:26.every other legislator in the world. Now I hope ministers don't think for

:06:27. > :06:34.one moment that this suggestion is the start of the slippery slope of

:06:35. > :06:42.ministers being replaced biro bots, not at all. LAUGHTER.

:06:43. > :06:47.But that is just one way of dealing with the problem. Perhaps the

:06:48. > :06:52.Government have got other ideas We have to get the preparation and the

:06:53. > :06:57.procedure right because if we don't the low standards will provhde an

:06:58. > :07:05.opportunity for poor or bad legislation which will undermine our

:07:06. > :07:10.culture of strong, fair-minded and responsible government, govdrnment

:07:11. > :07:17.scrutinised by parliament to make it fair-minded. It will undermhne those

:07:18. > :07:26.rules to protect the public good and then we will autumn be the losers.

:07:27. > :07:32.I thought it right to make ` brief intervention in this debate. I

:07:33. > :07:36.emphasise what I'm going to say is my personal view. I think most of

:07:37. > :07:43.what I have to say at least will be shared by other members of the

:07:44. > :07:53.committee. I want to deal whth the matter that arose after October 26th

:07:54. > :07:58.last year when you rejected the tax credits. There is room for lore than

:07:59. > :08:02.one respectable view as to whether that is the breach of the convention

:08:03. > :08:07.that existed. There is cert`inly a serious body of opinion that does

:08:08. > :08:17.take that view which, frankly, is one which I share. My Lords, the

:08:18. > :08:21.question, what we now do about that? Lord Strathclyde has reportdd. His

:08:22. > :08:30.report has not been univers`lly acclaimed, but widely appreciated

:08:31. > :08:43.for the detail into which hd went. A number of... None the less he raised

:08:44. > :08:49.issues that the Government will be considered. Before we decidd upon -

:08:50. > :08:53.before the Government decidds upon bringing in new legislation we

:08:54. > :08:58.should have an attempt at ldast at reestablishing the convention which

:08:59. > :09:06.some of us at least believe existed before October last year. I hope

:09:07. > :09:11.that process can be done. That would lead the acquiescence of all the

:09:12. > :09:15.major political groupings in the House and the opposition le`d by

:09:16. > :09:20.Baroness Smith and the Liberal Democrats under Lord Wallacd. The

:09:21. > :09:24.Liberal Democrats are not p`rty to the existing convention or what was

:09:25. > :09:27.the existing convention and are therefore not necessarily p`rties to

:09:28. > :09:31.it. They would have to be p`rty to the new one if that is what is

:09:32. > :09:35.decided upon. So indeed will the cross benches. How that can be

:09:36. > :09:38.achieved, I'm not so sure bdcause of course the cross benches take the

:09:39. > :09:40.view they are not united on anything.

:09:41. > :09:52.That is a matter they would have to decide.

:09:53. > :10:05.He will have to decide what assurances he can give to hhs

:10:06. > :10:12.colleagues if that is to proceed. The Right reverend bishops have to

:10:13. > :10:19.take part in all of this. They were party to the proceedings in 121

:10:20. > :10:30.when his late Majesty King John was persuaded to sign the Magna Carta.

:10:31. > :10:37.My Lords, if it is not posshble to reach a new and widely agredd.. I

:10:38. > :10:43.don't want to take up too mtch of his time but since he mentioned the

:10:44. > :10:47.Lib Dems and the cross benches, they were represented, they voted

:10:48. > :10:51.unanimously for its conclushons and they supported its conclusions on

:10:52. > :10:56.the floor of this House so they are committed. I am glad to hear that.

:10:57. > :11:06.There will need to be a new procedure now. It was a number of

:11:07. > :11:13.years ago now. Therefore, I think it needs to be re-established following

:11:14. > :11:19.the events of October last xear The new convention will need to set out

:11:20. > :11:25.the understanding that only in the most exceptional circumstances would

:11:26. > :11:30.your lordship's want to votd against a statutory instrument and H think I

:11:31. > :11:36.would wish to add to that that a motion for a significant delay would

:11:37. > :11:39.be very similar to a motion to negate a statutory instrument and I

:11:40. > :11:45.dare say the convention would need to recognise that point. I would

:11:46. > :11:50.like to make one other more current observation and that relates to the

:11:51. > :12:03.supporting documentation whhch has already been referred to two. I do

:12:04. > :12:11.have to say that at least 10% of the ex-banditry memoranda is very often

:12:12. > :12:19.inadequate and unsatisfactory and has to be rewritten or reproduced

:12:20. > :12:26.and we often have to ask for that. I regret that is the case but I hope

:12:27. > :12:32.you will understand that is an important part of the work we do. I

:12:33. > :12:37.would like to exempt my noble friend Lord Freud. He has recently gone to

:12:38. > :12:42.great lengths to persuade hhs department to support this

:12:43. > :12:52.legislation. I believe my colleagues on the select committee appreciate

:12:53. > :12:56.that likewise. There is somdthing of what you might call a jobbing

:12:57. > :13:03.legislator. Nine years on the backbenches, a couple of ye`rs as a

:13:04. > :13:12.whip, so while I cannot clahm the constitutional expertise of noble

:13:13. > :13:19.Lords, I am back on the backbenches and hope that my journey might be

:13:20. > :13:25.useful in the current discussions we are having. The theme of thhs debate

:13:26. > :13:29.is that we have to do things better and surely it is not beyond the wit

:13:30. > :13:34.of this great parliament and the people in it to revise, scrttinise

:13:35. > :13:39.and negotiate better legisl`tion. If the noble lady the leader took every

:13:40. > :13:44.and one of the sensible suggestions made today and made a list of them,

:13:45. > :13:49.I think that would be a verx good starting point. Though I find the

:13:50. > :13:53.notes from the library parthally useful, I did not buy the over

:13:54. > :13:58.emphasis on the Strathclyde ready because the overweening powdr of the

:13:59. > :14:04.executive and the battle to carry out proper and effective

:14:05. > :14:08.Parliamentary scrutiny is not new. It has to be said that I believe and

:14:09. > :14:14.I think others may have said this that we have too much legislation. I

:14:15. > :14:17.started to feel this was thd case during my own party's period in

:14:18. > :14:27.government and I believed it ever since. When I was reflecting on what

:14:28. > :14:33.to raise in this debate, I noticed that a moniker in the 14th century

:14:34. > :14:38.was also bemoaning the amount of legislation going through

:14:39. > :14:43.Parliament. -- monarch. Durhng the years my party was in government,

:14:44. > :14:48.the opposition regularly colplained about half baked legislation and I

:14:49. > :14:53.think sometimes they were rhght I think my Lords we are in a new

:14:54. > :14:58.territory today. Much of thd legislation in front of us hs

:14:59. > :15:01.totally uncut. I wonder if we might look in part to the answer to the

:15:02. > :15:13.question of why legislation on policy is being brought forward for

:15:14. > :15:21.Parliament to be presented hn an abysmal state is possibly bdcause

:15:22. > :15:28.the quality, standards, perhaps the economies to the Parliament`ry

:15:29. > :15:34.draughtsman service. Again `s I was rolling around trying to thhnk about

:15:35. > :15:36.how to express this, I had ` year of sitting with Parliamentary

:15:37. > :15:44.draughtsman and their service in the drafting of the equalities `ct 010.

:15:45. > :15:50.Before it was presented to Parliament. I have to say I found

:15:51. > :15:55.that a remarkable and very, very wonderful experience becausd not

:15:56. > :16:00.only were they clever, extrdmely clever actually, and considdred and

:16:01. > :16:02.diligent, it has to be said they produced a bill which we

:16:03. > :16:08.successfully navigated throtgh this House with cross-party support just

:16:09. > :16:15.before the general election, so I do have to ask, what sort... Is the

:16:16. > :16:23.draughtsman office being properly funded and properly supportdd? I did

:16:24. > :16:30.come across a poem drafted by a Parliamentary draughtsman in 19 7.

:16:31. > :16:35.It is unnamed and it says, H am a Parliamentary draughtsman, H compose

:16:36. > :16:40.the country's laws, and half the litigation I am undoubtedly because.

:16:41. > :16:45.I employ a kind of English which is hard to understand, though the

:16:46. > :16:53.purists do not like it or the lawyers think it's grand. So I do

:16:54. > :16:58.think there is actually a sdrious correction about the qualitx and

:16:59. > :17:02.standards of the registration and draft legislation that we are

:17:03. > :17:09.presenting with. The second point I would like to ask about which has

:17:10. > :17:16.been alluded to, that is th`t the internets has revolutionised who

:17:17. > :17:21.accesses the law, who accesses Parliament, who watches us `s we go

:17:22. > :17:30.about our work. Just as people are much more ready to check thd advice

:17:31. > :17:33.from their GP with medical `dvice online, people are looking to what

:17:34. > :17:40.we do here in Parliament and the legislation reproduced. Whereas 20

:17:41. > :17:45.years ago you might need lots of access to physical volumes to

:17:46. > :17:50.understand and access law, people can type data and human into Google

:17:51. > :17:54.and they are two clicks awax from a copy of the Data Protection Act and

:17:55. > :18:01.the Human Rights Act and anx other legislation. 2-3,000,000 visitors

:18:02. > :18:09.are accessing the National @rchives every month. This seems to le that

:18:10. > :18:16.we need to be less obscure. There is a need for more clarity abott how we

:18:17. > :18:20.express ourselves and how do we incentivise our departments to

:18:21. > :18:25.consider if they need to legislate, if it is too complicated and how to

:18:26. > :18:31.express their legislation in a language that we can all understand,

:18:32. > :18:37.including those people who `re watching us and watching how we

:18:38. > :18:47.work. And wanting sometimes to comment on it and access it. In

:18:48. > :18:52.2013, there were good law champions in every department. -- law

:18:53. > :19:01.champions. An emphasis on partnership including talking,

:19:02. > :19:07.listening. I wonder if thesd still exist and is anyone taking `ny

:19:08. > :19:11.notice of them? My Lords, those two questions I would like to ask about

:19:12. > :19:19.and I want to say briefly something about Henry VIII clauses. When I

:19:20. > :19:22.came into the House in 1998, the Government was accused of pttting a

:19:23. > :19:27.Henry VIII clause in a piecd of legislation. There was no gospel

:19:28. > :19:34.disapproval but certainly the Government was pressed very severely

:19:35. > :19:39.and as a result took that away and we sorted. My government did not

:19:40. > :19:49.have a majority in the Housd at the time. I welcome this timely debate

:19:50. > :19:55.initiated by the noble lady Baroness Smith of Basildon. There is much

:19:56. > :19:57.that needs to be done to strengthen Parliament in scrutinising the

:19:58. > :20:02.executive and its legislative measures. However before addressing

:20:03. > :20:07.what is wrong with the procdss, let me say a few words about wh`t is

:20:08. > :20:11.right with it. Parliament is now arguably at his strongest in modern

:20:12. > :20:16.political history in scrutinising the executive. MPs are much more

:20:17. > :20:22.independent in their voting behaviour. Both houses are luch more

:20:23. > :20:27.specialised, and better informed as well as more open. Government no

:20:28. > :20:32.longer has a stranglehold on the timetable in the Commons. The House

:20:33. > :20:36.has acquired the backbench business committee and the petitions

:20:37. > :20:46.committee. The whips have lost their patronage in terms of the chairs and

:20:47. > :20:52.members of the select committee In terms of legislative scrutiny, the

:20:53. > :20:57.Commons has far more impact than is reflected in the small numbdr of

:20:58. > :21:01.non-government amendments accepted. The Commons has introduced public

:21:02. > :21:06.Bill committees and this Hotse we now utilise ad hoc committeds for

:21:07. > :21:10.important post-legislative scrutiny, a development that place broke

:21:11. > :21:17.months to the strength of this House. The constitution comlittee

:21:18. > :21:20.does excellent work in reporting on bills of constitutional

:21:21. > :21:30.significance. There is thus good news. What then is the problem? In

:21:31. > :21:35.terms of legislation the prhmary problem is the sheer volume. The

:21:36. > :21:39.growth in the volume both of acts and statutory instruments d`tes from

:21:40. > :21:47.the 1990s. But the greatest increased taking place in the number

:21:48. > :21:53.of pages of statutory instrtments, it's not numbers, it is length.

:21:54. > :21:59.There were two changes, first in the 1990s and then from 2005 onwards.

:22:00. > :22:03.The problem is quantitative as well as quantitative. It is not just

:22:04. > :22:08.length but also complexity `nd scope. The noble and learned Lord

:22:09. > :22:12.Judge has called attention to the growth of Henry the eighth

:22:13. > :22:22.provisions. The Government hs trying to do too much. The Constitttion

:22:23. > :22:28.committee in its 2004 report on Parliament and the ledger process

:22:29. > :22:34.looked at the process holistically. It made the case for pre-legislative

:22:35. > :22:39.scrutiny to be the norm. Th`t fits with the wording of today's motion.

:22:40. > :22:42.There was an increase in thd number of bills submitted for

:22:43. > :22:47.pre-legislative scrutiny in the last Parliament but the number h`s varied

:22:48. > :22:52.over time and remains reliant on government to determine which of its

:22:53. > :22:55.own bills merits such scruthny. The committee also made other

:22:56. > :23:01.recommendations of relevancd to the motion today. It recommended that

:23:02. > :23:05.all bills should be subject at some point to detailed examination by a

:23:06. > :23:10.Parliamentary committee on power to take evidence. Government bhlls

:23:11. > :23:13.starting life in the Commons now go to evidence taking public Bhll

:23:14. > :23:20.committees. Bills introduced here do not get sense to an evidencd

:23:21. > :23:25.committee either here on or the Other Place. The committee `lso

:23:26. > :23:31.suggested explanatory notes suggested the purpose of thd bill

:23:32. > :23:35.and how it achieved its purpose That would be a very good dhscipline

:23:36. > :23:44.on government. There is also linked to that a case for alleged to

:23:45. > :23:48.standard committee to make sure bills need to set standards and that

:23:49. > :23:49.the check is undertaken in Parliament and not solely bx

:23:50. > :23:57.government. The problem though is writ large in

:23:58. > :24:04.terms of secondary legislathon. As the Hansard Society object served

:24:05. > :24:08.the use of delegated legisl`tion by successive governments has

:24:09. > :24:12.increasingly drifting into `reas of principle and policy rather than the

:24:13. > :24:17.regulation of administrativd procedures and technical ardas of

:24:18. > :24:21.operational detail. That, mx Lords, is why secondary legislation is

:24:22. > :24:24.presently on the political `genda. It's important to understand the

:24:25. > :24:27.cause of the miss chief. Thd report of my noble friend, Lord

:24:28. > :24:33.Strathclyde, addressed the symptom and not the cause. In any event was

:24:34. > :24:38.based on a false premise. It opened by defining convention and then

:24:39. > :24:42.proceeded to ignore it it. Ht's not clear my Lords why this house should

:24:43. > :24:45.be penalised for the Governlent using secondary legislation for

:24:46. > :24:52.purposes for which it was not intended. The Government ard infect

:24:53. > :24:55.saying - we wanted to use sdcondary legislation to achieve policy goals

:24:56. > :25:00.without sustained parliamentary scrutiny and we intend to lddge

:25:01. > :25:07.slate to try to restrict thd House of Lords in order so we can do so in

:25:08. > :25:11.the future without challengds. Lord Cunningham has quoted the committee

:25:12. > :25:17.that concluded such legislation would be an overreaction and

:25:18. > :25:21.entirely disproportion anyw`y to the how old legitimate exercise of a

:25:22. > :25:28.power that even Lord Strathclyde has admitside rarely used. My Lords the

:25:29. > :25:32.Government should be reviewhng its own procedures. Can my nobld friend,

:25:33. > :25:37.the Leader of the House, tell us what the Government are doing to

:25:38. > :25:42.ensure that departments do not misuse delegated legislation and

:25:43. > :25:45.what constraints it plans to introduce to ensure that Strategic

:25:46. > :25:49.Rail Authority awe Tory Frenches do not drift into areas of principle

:25:50. > :25:54.and policy? These are the qtestions we should be addressing. We should

:25:55. > :26:00.not be distractions by the Government's attempts to bl`me this

:26:01. > :26:05.House for its own failings. My Lords, there is a lot we nedd to do.

:26:06. > :26:09.We should acknowledge what has already been achieved, we are much

:26:10. > :26:16.stronger than many realise, but what we need to do is to build on that

:26:17. > :26:21.and ensure that parliament hs truly effective in calling Governlent to

:26:22. > :26:24.account. The bottle of parlhamentary scrutiny may be filling up, but

:26:25. > :26:38.there is still an awful long way to go. My Lords, it's a pleasure to

:26:39. > :26:48.follow him and a number of his remarks I agree. The House of Lords

:26:49. > :26:53.has regarded as an important constitutional obligation to

:26:54. > :26:57.consider these kind of mattdrs dispassionately, in a nonpartisan

:26:58. > :27:03.way. That has been the overwhelming spirit of today's discussions. The

:27:04. > :27:10.the Government of the day of any political persuasion will always

:27:11. > :27:17.want to get its business through as readily as possible. That c`nnot be

:27:18. > :27:25.the starting point at which the Houses of Parliament considdr how it

:27:26. > :27:35.scrutinises legislation. It's an important element, but it c`n't be

:27:36. > :27:41.the purpose of scrutiny. Thd issue of secondary legislation has loomed

:27:42. > :27:46.large but, as has been said by many people today, the root causd lies in

:27:47. > :27:51.the primary legislation. Secondary legislation gives the Executive

:27:52. > :27:55.enormous powers with much ldss scrutiny than primary legislation.

:27:56. > :28:00.Most people outside of Westlinster don't understand the differdnce

:28:01. > :28:05.between primary and secondary. Most - large amounts of legislathon

:28:06. > :28:09.affect people in their everx day lives is actually through sdcondary

:28:10. > :28:14.legislation. Those changes can make an enormous difference to pdople's

:28:15. > :28:24.lives. The tax credits was ` very good example of that. So thd primary

:28:25. > :28:29.legislation is the root cause, but the secondary legislation rdsults

:28:30. > :28:35.from it has been granted secondary legislation stages by both Houses

:28:36. > :28:40.and in so doing it does givd the Government of the day subst`ntial

:28:41. > :28:47.powers with less scrutiny than otherwise. Therefore, the role of

:28:48. > :28:52.both Houses in scrutinising secondary legislation actually takes

:28:53. > :28:58.on rather more importance than one might imagine. In primary

:28:59. > :29:04.legislation this House can ultimately reject a Bill or an

:29:05. > :29:09.element of a Bill. It can bd subject to the Paramilitary Act that is a

:29:10. > :29:15.substantial and very rarely used power. In secondary legislation

:29:16. > :29:23.this House has the power to reject, yes it does, but only five or six

:29:24. > :29:29.times in 50 or 60 years or lore Now nobody outside of parliament would

:29:30. > :29:37.ever regard that as an excessive or dangerous use of the powers of this

:29:38. > :29:45.House. So the use of powers to reject are very, very few indeed. It

:29:46. > :29:55.requires some care by any government. It could be a government

:29:56. > :30:00.my party is control of, the current government or future governlent will

:30:01. > :30:05.always be frustrated by it hf it happens. That isn't the bashs for

:30:06. > :30:08.wanting to change powers. I would say myself, woe betide any

:30:09. > :30:15.government that say it is's going to take away the power of a Hotse of

:30:16. > :30:24.Parliament because once in so many years it used that power. That is an

:30:25. > :30:30.abuse of power on the part of Government. I hope the Government

:30:31. > :30:37.thinks very, very carefully indeed before it uses one case in the long

:30:38. > :30:40.time to say it's then going to change the constitutional position

:30:41. > :30:47.of this House. I come back to those points in a moment. I turn briefly

:30:48. > :30:51.to the secondary legislation. I have the privilege, which I didn't regard

:30:52. > :30:54.the privilege when I was first appointed, being on the secondary

:30:55. > :31:01.legislation scrutiny committee for three years. I've just finished to

:31:02. > :31:05.the delight of the postman who delivers the weekly mail to my house

:31:06. > :31:08.in Leeds. I learnt a number of things from that, I did learn how

:31:09. > :31:16.very important secondary legislation is compared to what I realised

:31:17. > :31:20.before I went on that committee I've always realised I was

:31:21. > :31:24.interested in, but I didn't realise how important it is for so lany

:31:25. > :31:31.things. So I realise how important it is. I also realise how ilportant

:31:32. > :31:38.the role of this House is in scrutinising that secondary

:31:39. > :31:42.legislation as the Public Accounts Committee, it's to the how old to

:31:43. > :31:53.which parliament owe as debt for scrutiny. We scrutinised around

:31:54. > :31:58.1,000 instruments a year. 8$ negative, 20% affirmative. We

:31:59. > :32:06.referred 10% to the House for ourselves. Lord Wakeham correctly

:32:07. > :32:10.said in the Queen's Speech that the House of Commons has considdred and

:32:11. > :32:15.approved secondary legislathon before the House of Lords. That is

:32:16. > :32:19.not true. Secondary legislation goes to both Houses from the Govdrnment,

:32:20. > :32:26.not to this House from the House of Commons, from the Government. We

:32:27. > :32:31.have a parallel duty to consider that. About 10%-11% of secondary

:32:32. > :32:37.legislation is considered and approved by this House before the

:32:38. > :32:42.Commons. So we do a very, vdry important job. I'll return, finally,

:32:43. > :33:03.to the question of the largdr issue. The Strathclyde Report made the

:33:04. > :33:07.snake oil solution - we will let you reject it once, but then thd House

:33:08. > :33:11.of Commons can override you. I have to say all my experience, not large

:33:12. > :33:16.of the House of Commons, but all my colleagues also for the House of

:33:17. > :33:23.Commons will tell me that rdally doesn't work. Absolutely.

:33:24. > :33:26.Overwhelmingly Governments tse their majority in the House of Colmons to

:33:27. > :33:31.get their business through. The idea that this House will reject once and

:33:32. > :33:34.the House of Commons will consider carefully what was said there will

:33:35. > :33:44.be substantial debates in rdsponse to the Minister is simply

:33:45. > :33:49.hocus-pocus. It's not true. My Lords, the words in the mothon

:33:50. > :33:53."parliament having full det`ils on all legislation to be considered"

:33:54. > :33:59.have a particular resonance for those of us who sat through 45-hours

:34:00. > :34:03.of committee proceedings on the Housing Bill. That Bill is `ll I

:34:04. > :34:08.want to talk about today. It was a classic case of abuse in thd

:34:09. > :34:14.production of legislation. Secondly, it's a reason for today's ddbate. It

:34:15. > :34:21.was a Skelton Bill as defindd in the Joint Committee on conventions

:34:22. > :34:25.report of 2005. It was a Bill riddled with rifrjss to the need for

:34:26. > :34:32.secondary legislation. On mx count, between the Bill and its schedules

:34:33. > :34:36.there were potentially 81 statutory instruments covering over 100

:34:37. > :34:42.separate issues, all to be determined following Royal @ssent.

:34:43. > :34:46.Almost every one of these SH's covered an area of controversy. I've

:34:47. > :34:52.heard it said in the Commons, but the reason why the Government choose

:34:53. > :34:56.to introduce the Bill in thhs way avoiding providing details covering

:34:57. > :35:02.the more controversial areas was because the Government with its

:35:03. > :35:07.small majority was concerned that too much detail during Common stages

:35:08. > :35:10.could have provoked difficulties in on their own benches and early

:35:11. > :35:20.passage of the Bill. I suspdct that will be the last time for that to

:35:21. > :35:24.happen. An indicator of what happens when parliament is denied ftll

:35:25. > :35:29.details came in an amendment on the last day in committee after 17

:35:30. > :35:35.sessions of consideration. The amend am was introduced to begin the

:35:36. > :35:41.process of phasing out long,term council tenants. Ten ant cyst

:35:42. > :35:55.outside London and replace them with two to five-year t tenants. The

:35:56. > :35:59.approach the Government took during proceedings avoided a consthtuency

:36:00. > :36:04.backlash on this matter frol members of the other House. There wdre

:36:05. > :36:10.potentially whole sections of this Bill which we simply could not

:36:11. > :36:14.acommend leaving us with only fatal motions which some of us find

:36:15. > :36:27.difficulty supporting on prhnciple and which I'll come to later. I will

:36:28. > :36:37.give an example. The Bill under Regulation Statutory Instrulents.

:36:38. > :36:45.The Secretary of State must obtain the consent of HMRC before laking

:36:46. > :36:52.arrangements with a private body to fulfil thisfunction. If you Werritty

:36:53. > :36:55.a council tenant not in recdipt of any benefit, modern means-tdsted,

:36:56. > :37:00.whatever your income, in particular if you had a total gross hotsehold

:37:01. > :37:08.income outside of London of more than ?30,000, or ?40,000 in London a

:37:09. > :37:13.private company in the form of Capita could access your income and

:37:14. > :37:17.potentially breach your privacy as part of the verification process

:37:18. > :37:23.without your specific consent. I believe this was an unprecedented

:37:24. > :37:27.use of regulations with little detail in the Bill particul`rly on

:37:28. > :37:31.the process of verification which we should have been able to consider

:37:32. > :37:34.during proceeding and which they cannot amend in the statutory

:37:35. > :37:42.instrument. The ministers on the Bill, one of whom is here today

:37:43. > :37:46.sought to defend can the indefensive by assuring the House that

:37:47. > :37:50.regulations and guidance wotld be introduced following upon

:37:51. > :37:53.consultation that was to take place at a later stage. The Bill was

:37:54. > :37:58.premature. Whether you agred with its provisions or not because it was

:37:59. > :38:03.so controversial it should not have been introduced until the

:38:04. > :38:07.consultation on its most contentious provisions had been completdd. The

:38:08. > :38:10.Bill in its final hours in this House was the subject of allost

:38:11. > :38:16.unparallel protest on the floor one evening all to be found in Hansard

:38:17. > :38:22.of the 23rd March. Finally, I would like to return to the issue of fatal

:38:23. > :38:30.motions on SI's on which I have very strong views. Behind closed doors in

:38:31. > :38:35.my Labour Party group meetings, I have consistently argued ag`inst

:38:36. > :38:38.voting on fatales. To me, as a former member of the House of

:38:39. > :38:45.Commons, it was a matter of great principle. I have to confess, but

:38:46. > :38:53.against my party line, I declined to vote in the tax credit regulations

:38:54. > :38:59.division on the basis that H regarded the amendment as f`tal But

:39:00. > :39:04.after years arguing on principle, my experience on the Housing Bhll has

:39:05. > :39:11.changed my mind. If the Govdrnment want to play silly games with

:39:12. > :39:16.Skelton bills, then an Opposition, despite being unelected, I'l afraid

:39:17. > :39:21.we have no option but to retaliate by blocking statue Tory instruments

:39:22. > :39:27.and I deeply regret that. Furthermore, and finally, I cannot

:39:28. > :39:32.see how we can possible intdrfere in the current arrangements of the

:39:33. > :39:40.handling of SI's until we h`ve established a process for

:39:41. > :39:44.determining a proper deposition of what constitutes "exception`l

:39:45. > :39:51.circumstances" as set out in the 2006 report of my noble fridnd.

:39:52. > :39:55.Secondly, received a commitlent by Government to aa void the use and

:39:56. > :39:57.indeed the abuse of Skelton bills in the way it happened on the Housing

:39:58. > :40:09.Bill. I guess it is one of the grdat

:40:10. > :40:16.strengths of the House of lords does seem to be a considerable alount of

:40:17. > :40:20.thinking that goes on betwedn subjects and that is to the credit

:40:21. > :40:27.of everybody but I think particularly today of the Ldader of

:40:28. > :40:33.the Opposition. I think what she said was sorry sensible. Wh`t I

:40:34. > :40:38.wanted was a proper discusshon on these matters and I wanted that to

:40:39. > :40:44.be led by the opposition because governments have the chance to bring

:40:45. > :40:48.in legislation is if they w`nt to. Oppositions have the power to

:40:49. > :40:52.persuade people that we are not doing things the right way `nd we

:40:53. > :40:59.ought to change things to do it I am full of praise for the start of

:41:00. > :41:03.the debate and what we do and I am hesitant to say a lot of thd things

:41:04. > :41:08.I might have said otherwise because I don't want to prejudice a proper

:41:09. > :41:13.discussion of all these matters which I think is not best done in

:41:14. > :41:20.the atmosphere of the House. I think the thing is we are not as bad as

:41:21. > :41:27.some have made up. If we look back to the debate made on the 24th of

:41:28. > :41:35.March, there were a lot of concerns expressed but there were a lot of

:41:36. > :41:44.things which seem to me mord less, most people agreed. There w`s a

:41:45. > :41:51.pretty good uniformity that things were not good at the present time.

:41:52. > :41:56.Those were concerned between clashes between the Lords and the House of

:41:57. > :42:01.Commons and those that argudd there were clashes between the exdcutive

:42:02. > :42:05.and Parliament and it was Lord Butler that pointed out that in

:42:06. > :42:14.reality they are both the s`me thing. We ought not to get too

:42:15. > :42:19.uptight about it. There was also a general feeling that a government

:42:20. > :42:30.with a majority is entitled to get its business. Finally, whild nobody

:42:31. > :42:39.actually brought out legisl`tion, I think there was a general fdeling

:42:40. > :42:43.that we can find a way dealhng with these matters without legislation,

:42:44. > :42:48.that would be a great advantage to everybody. There were some things we

:42:49. > :42:54.disagreed with. Statutory instruments, Henry VIII clatses It

:42:55. > :42:59.is 44 years since I first c`me into Parliament and I have to sax these

:43:00. > :43:05.debates have been going on `ll of that time and probably will go on

:43:06. > :43:10.for another 44 years after H have long since disappeared and the other

:43:11. > :43:14.difference is not overwhelmhngly on one side -- evidence. There are

:43:15. > :43:24.people who argue that is not what has been happening. It is the same

:43:25. > :43:30.and I think Lord Norton said something like this a minutd ago,

:43:31. > :43:35.the arguments that the execttive is becoming more powerful than

:43:36. > :43:39.Parliament, there is quite ` lot of academic research demonstrating that

:43:40. > :43:43.Parliament is much more powdrful over the executive than it dver was

:43:44. > :43:48.in the past, considerable alount of academic information of what

:43:49. > :43:53.Parliament has done to bills government has brought in. H want a

:43:54. > :44:08.discussion of these things `nd find a better way forward. There was yet

:44:09. > :44:12.a mention, Lord riches was puite right to raise the question of

:44:13. > :44:18.financial privilege. We need to know what goes on there. -- Lord

:44:19. > :44:24.Richards. Whether it is properly controlled and whether it is not. It

:44:25. > :44:28.is not that we are worried `bout the House of lords having the rhght to

:44:29. > :44:32.vote down secondary legislation It is the fact that under the present

:44:33. > :44:39.system it is a total and colplete veto on the matter. If we c`n find a

:44:40. > :44:43.way to get over that, then of course we will have a proper debatd and

:44:44. > :44:52.discussion but an absolute veto is not what I think is acceptable in

:44:53. > :44:56.this day and age. I very much welcome the tone of a lot of the

:44:57. > :45:00.contribution to this debate. There are ways forward, there are ways

:45:01. > :45:04.that don't require legislathon but it does require a certain alount of

:45:05. > :45:13.goodwill and cooperation between all sides of the House. I apologise for

:45:14. > :45:17.the time. He mentioned an absolute veto. Is it not the case th`t a

:45:18. > :45:33.statutory instrument rejectdd by this House, an old first of all was

:45:34. > :45:41.brought back with a change of title. That is what happened in thd case of

:45:42. > :45:45.the Rhodesian sanctions. Of course. Somebody who has spent as m`ny years

:45:46. > :45:50.in business management as I have knows there are ways round `ll sorts

:45:51. > :45:57.of things. But the fact of the matter is, a statutory instrument

:45:58. > :46:01.rejected by this House is ddad. That in my opinion is a nonsense. We have

:46:02. > :46:06.to find a way to give this House more influence and recognisd that in

:46:07. > :46:15.the end, the House of Commons has the final stay. -- say. I

:46:16. > :46:22.congratulate my noble friend on introducing this debate. Thd balance

:46:23. > :46:33.of power between government and parliament is something both houses

:46:34. > :46:37.should discuss on a regular basis, including... There have been some

:46:38. > :46:43.interesting developments whhch are relevant to the overall bal`nce of

:46:44. > :46:46.power and I think that is the case. There have not been similar changes

:46:47. > :46:53.in this House which is also of interest. It is a fact that having

:46:54. > :47:01.full details of legislation is only one aspect of that issue of balance

:47:02. > :47:05.of power. I think for good reason colleagues have concentrated on that

:47:06. > :47:11.issue in this debate this afternoon. Perhaps I should also start by

:47:12. > :47:17.declaring an interest or maxbe a confession, because I have been both

:47:18. > :47:22.a poacher and a gamekeeper. I have served leader as the House of

:47:23. > :47:25.Commons, I have also served as Chief Whip and have been proud and

:47:26. > :47:31.fortunate to serve in both of those positions. I have also been a

:47:32. > :47:39.backbencher and am now a melber of the Constitution committee. I

:47:40. > :47:44.mentioned that experience bdcause I hope that it gives me perhaps a

:47:45. > :47:50.balanced approach to the different interests that are there. Wd have an

:47:51. > :47:54.unusual Parliamentary systel, and unusual government system bdcause

:47:55. > :48:00.the executive comes from thd legislator and that is diffdrent

:48:01. > :48:07.from the case in most countries It is one that creates tension and that

:48:08. > :48:13.tension can actually be constructive if it is used in the right kind of

:48:14. > :48:17.way and if people are aware of the roles and the limits on the roles

:48:18. > :48:22.that they actually have. Thdre have been many suggestions today for

:48:23. > :48:30.improvements in how we look at legislation. Pre-legislativd

:48:31. > :48:34.scrutiny which I must mention was a recommendation of the modernisation

:48:35. > :48:49.committee in 1997, so it was not all bad. A mention have been -- has been

:48:50. > :48:54.made of the fact we do use Henry VIII clauses too often. As `

:48:55. > :49:00.business manager it must be a step too far to say never for Henry VIII

:49:01. > :49:05.clauses. We have to consider their role in that way. However, the fact

:49:06. > :49:10.that you say never does not excuse what has been happening in recent

:49:11. > :49:16.years and on that, it is absolutely right and when he said that one bill

:49:17. > :49:20.consisted of a whole series of blank pages, it is a wake-up call to

:49:21. > :49:29.everyone to realise just how far things have gone in that direction.

:49:30. > :49:36.I don't think that in government those of us who were business

:49:37. > :49:43.managers ever went so far, but .I would mention to the House `nd it's

:49:44. > :49:48.something that kept coming tp, I kept being asked which MP g`ve you

:49:49. > :49:57.the most problems when you `re Chief Whip? It used to be sort of an

:49:58. > :50:01.expectation of which serious rebel was the most difficult. In `ctual

:50:02. > :50:06.fact, when I was leader of the House, when I was Chief Whip, the

:50:07. > :50:11.greatest problems came from ministers. Ministers who were trying

:50:12. > :50:15.to do too much, trying to introduce skeleton bills, trying to introduce

:50:16. > :50:21.Christmas tree bills, new cruises late on and trying to express the

:50:22. > :50:25.whips and everyone else to stab their fingers and get all that

:50:26. > :50:34.business through. It was difficult, they were always push, they were

:50:35. > :50:37.encouraged by civil servants. Some departments were particularly

:50:38. > :50:42.difficult. When we were in government we had what was called

:50:43. > :50:49.the ledge committee of Cabinet and every single piece of legislation

:50:50. > :50:53.that was to be introduced h`d to go through the legislation comlittee.

:50:54. > :50:59.Every minister presented thd bill had to take it to that commhttee and

:51:00. > :51:05.it had to pass certain tests. The Treasury had to be willing to sign

:51:06. > :51:09.it off, it has to be accept`ble on human rights grounds, environmental

:51:10. > :51:14.grounds and so on, and one of the questions that was always asked at

:51:15. > :51:18.that committee was, what ard the implications in terms of delegated

:51:19. > :51:25.legislation? We did have Lords, business managers on that committee

:51:26. > :51:31.and they did frequently remhnd us of the difficulties of getting to

:51:32. > :51:37.carried away with what you could do by secondary legislation. I have

:51:38. > :51:43.been listening to this carefully and I was concerned with what mx noble

:51:44. > :51:48.friend Lord Campbell said about the housing bill and what he had been

:51:49. > :51:52.told about why some amendments were introduced so late. It was `

:51:53. > :51:56.deliberate tactic and I was also concerned with what my nobld friend

:51:57. > :52:02.quoted in the article from the Financial Times, where a political

:52:03. > :52:09.aide had said it was deliberate policy to try to use statutory

:52:10. > :52:14.instruments wherever possible. That means it is not an accident that we

:52:15. > :52:19.have seen such a mushrooming in statutory instruments and Lord

:52:20. > :52:23.Strathclyde can make his pohnt about the numbers, but I think thd point

:52:24. > :52:30.that Lord Norton made about the pages, the length of SI is hmportant

:52:31. > :52:35.as is the fact that we are now seeing more policy issues introduced

:52:36. > :52:43.through SI and that is really what is causing asked difficultids. This

:52:44. > :52:48.trend is dangerous. Baroness Andrews is right to call it a step change in

:52:49. > :52:53.terms of what we have seen hn recent years and it is not just a puestion

:52:54. > :52:59.of the niceties of Parliament, or how this House behaves. It hs very

:53:00. > :53:05.basic in terms of democratic accountability, but it is also very

:53:06. > :53:08.important about the quality of legislation and the impact of the

:53:09. > :53:15.policies on people in subsepuent years. Because if we are seding the

:53:16. > :53:22.situation where ministers are future proofing their powers, I thhnk it is

:53:23. > :53:27.very dangerous indeed. I'm `fraid Lord Strathclyde's recommendations

:53:28. > :53:32.are not the way forward. It is not even just for this House and the

:53:33. > :53:38.Other Place to consider how they deal with SIs. It is to my lind

:53:39. > :53:44.fundamental that the Governlent itself looks at the way it

:53:45. > :53:47.introduces legislation and has better preparation and that

:53:48. > :53:52.ministers take responsibility for the policies that they are putting

:53:53. > :53:59.forward. Like all the other contributors to this, when H start

:54:00. > :54:05.by congratulating Baroness Smith of Basildon for introducing thhs topic

:54:06. > :54:16.and for doing so insights a constructive manner. I think this is

:54:17. > :54:22.a debate that will pay rere`ding in the days and weeks ahead. There is a

:54:23. > :54:26.delicate balance lying at the heart of our Constitution. The balance

:54:27. > :54:30.between the executive and P`rliament and it is important we are `lways on

:54:31. > :54:37.our guard to make sure the balance does not tip too far in one

:54:38. > :54:41.direction. As a Liberal Democrat, the distribution of politic`l power

:54:42. > :54:48.is an issue of prime import`nce It is fundamental the belief that

:54:49. > :54:51.sovereignty rests with the people and that authority in the ddmocracy

:54:52. > :54:56.derives from the people and these fillies point to a strong ddmocratic

:54:57. > :55:01.process with a just and representative government. Decisions

:55:02. > :55:07.have been taken at those particle levels. A key role of Parli`ment in

:55:08. > :55:13.a democracy is to hold the Government of the day to account and

:55:14. > :55:18.that applies to both chambers. We do this by Christians, challenging the

:55:19. > :55:19.executive's policies and actions and senior officials to account publicly

:55:20. > :55:26.for their decisions. There have been a number of positive

:55:27. > :55:31.developments in recent years, also here and in the House of Colmons,

:55:32. > :55:35.which have improved the bal`nce between executive and legislature.

:55:36. > :55:41.Changes as the recommendations as of the Write Committee, new

:55:42. > :55:47.arrangements for Select Comlittee. Your lord ships house the ad hoc

:55:48. > :55:52.committees which allows us to look at issues facing the countrx in a

:55:53. > :56:01.timely manner and the practhce of one of these committees to look

:56:02. > :56:06.scrutiny. Added to that we have topical questions for short debate

:56:07. > :56:09.and perhaps more time could be made available, increasing time hasn t

:56:10. > :56:13.been made available for these. I do believe that there is still some

:56:14. > :56:18.distance to go on the path to reform. At the heart of the

:56:19. > :56:21.challenge before us is the capacity of Parliament to scrutinise a volume

:56:22. > :56:28.of legislation which is routinely presented by the Government of the

:56:29. > :56:34.day. Lord Cunningham mentioned the paper by Mr Daniel Greenberg between

:56:35. > :56:42.1960 and 1965 the average ntmber of clauses in a new Act was 24. Between

:56:43. > :56:47.2010 and 2015 they had risen to 49. There hasn't been the auto

:56:48. > :56:54.equivalent of parliamentary time devoted to scrutinising thel. In

:56:55. > :57:04.1960 there was 1,200 A5 pagds, 010 the same document had grown to 700.

:57:05. > :57:09.A significant increase. Baroness Smith quoted from the committee

:57:10. > :57:13.chaired by the noble lord, Lord Lang, what it said in its rdcent

:57:14. > :57:19.report, the nature of statutory instruments has changed. Delegated

:57:20. > :57:23.powers and primary legislathon are being drafted in poor and broad

:57:24. > :57:27.language that allowed Governments to address issues of policy and

:57:28. > :57:31.principle rather than points of an administrative and technical nature.

:57:32. > :57:35.Examples have been given of bills in previous sessions. Indeed bhlls in

:57:36. > :57:38.this session where that has been the case that was graphically

:57:39. > :57:45.illustration of the housing and planning act in the last session

:57:46. > :57:49.bye-bye the noble lady and lord If there is increasing legislation

:57:50. > :57:54.being presented to paramilitary the more policies implemented bx way of

:57:55. > :58:02.statutory sfruments there mtst be a concern as to whether parli`ment has

:58:03. > :58:09.the capacity to cope and to perform its role effectively and

:58:10. > :58:13.efficiently. It's compounded if the bill is inadequate. Much emphasis

:58:14. > :58:16.made in the debate about thd importance ever having impact

:58:17. > :58:22.assessments on time, draft regulations and code of practice.

:58:23. > :58:26.Another paragraph in this document from Mr Greenberg caught my eye Not

:58:27. > :58:30.just secondary legislation where much of the detail is found. As he

:58:31. > :58:35.says another rule of law issue of concern to many is the enorlous

:58:36. > :58:38.growth since around 2000 of the use of powers to make legislation in the

:58:39. > :58:42.form of guidance, of codes, of schemes and other sfruments which

:58:43. > :58:48.have legislative effect which are not given the for ma'am of scrutiny.

:58:49. > :58:51.They are not published in the archives legislation site. Published

:58:52. > :58:57.on the Government's central website they can be difficult or impossible

:58:58. > :59:03.to find even if one knows of their existence. There is regulathon which

:59:04. > :59:09.parliament barely gets an opportunity to look at. I mdntioned

:59:10. > :59:14.before how this House has updated its procedures and practice to deal

:59:15. > :59:19.with more legislation. The delegated powers and regulatory form committee

:59:20. > :59:23.and the scrutiny committee, both committees it's agreed across the

:59:24. > :59:29.House provide us with an invaluable service. The work they conshder

:59:30. > :59:33.carry out in statutory elemdnts It might be something the other place

:59:34. > :59:38.would want to emulate. It's important to remind yourselves, Lord

:59:39. > :59:43.Cunningham was right to say the conclusions of his, the joint

:59:44. > :59:47.committee he chaired were endorsed by the Liberal Democrats, lord

:59:48. > :59:52.McNally served on that economy, it did conclude that the House of Lords

:59:53. > :59:54.should not regularly reject statutory instruments but in

:59:55. > :00:00.exceptional circumstance it is may be appropriate for it to do so. I

:00:01. > :00:04.think to roll back from that in anyway would be delusion of the

:00:05. > :00:09.power of parliament. Not just of the power of Your Lordships House. It's

:00:10. > :00:12.against that context we look at the recommendations proposed by the

:00:13. > :00:17.review conducted by Lord Strathclyde. It's not exactly had a

:00:18. > :00:21.great press from the various committees which have reported on

:00:22. > :00:25.it. The influential committdes of Your Lordships house as well as the

:00:26. > :00:30.public administration and constitutional affairs commhttee of

:00:31. > :00:37.the House of Commons. The common view best summed up by the lord of

:00:38. > :00:41.Louth said, Lord Strathclydd's review is not a minor technhcal

:00:42. > :00:46.report it's quite dangerous in seeking to con strain the c`n

:00:47. > :00:48.capacity of parliament to c`ll the Government to account. The House of

:00:49. > :00:52.Commons committee to which has been referred to, the Government's time

:00:53. > :00:58.would be better spent in rethinking the way it he relies on secondary

:00:59. > :01:00.legislation for implementing its policy objectives and buildhng

:01:01. > :01:08.better relations with other groups in the House of Commons. We believe

:01:09. > :01:13.that both Houses of parliamdnt should be requesting better way to

:01:14. > :01:15.work together to show a mord informed and effective scrutiny of

:01:16. > :01:18.the Government's legislation and actions. We continue to rejdct the

:01:19. > :01:22.notion that any Government `chieving majority in the House of Colmons

:01:23. > :01:26.should have an absolute powdr to prosecute its business without the

:01:27. > :01:31.proper burden of checks and balances. As Baroness Smith said,

:01:32. > :01:35.not, the Government of the day isn't always right about everything and at

:01:36. > :01:40.all times. We shouldn't confuse the primacy of the House of Comlons with

:01:41. > :01:45.the primacy of the executivd. It's an important distinction to be made

:01:46. > :01:49.there. I think it is incumbdnt if our parliament, not just to fight

:01:50. > :01:53.against moves to weaken our ability to hold the executive to account,

:01:54. > :02:00.but to improve our procedurds. We had suggestion, good suggestions

:02:01. > :02:07.today, the pause button refdrred to by the noble lady, the proposal made

:02:08. > :02:11.by my noble friend Baroness Smith who drew attention to the f`ct that

:02:12. > :02:14.the House of Commons has passed resolutions which the Government do

:02:15. > :02:19.nothing about. That's something we should perhaps examine. The Scottish

:02:20. > :02:24.Parliament has a way which the committees of the parliament can be

:02:25. > :02:30.the sponsors of legislation. Again, the proposals by Mr Greenberg which

:02:31. > :02:35.suggest there should be an `n debate because every Bill or every Act when

:02:36. > :02:38.it's passed should have somdthing attached indicating how much

:02:39. > :02:46.scrutiny it actually did receive. If the Government had to debatd that

:02:47. > :02:54.annually it might make ministers think before they acted. My Lords,

:02:55. > :02:59.Lord Judge said, how long c`n we go on talk? We take his point laybe

:03:00. > :03:04.some time for action. There is a lot of good ideas. I hope when she

:03:05. > :03:07.responds to it I hope the Ldader of the House will respond in the

:03:08. > :03:12.constructive spirit in which people have contributed to it. I do believe

:03:13. > :03:18.what is probably needside a willingness to seize some

:03:19. > :03:25.initiative. My Lords, I defhnitely will pick up from where the noble

:03:26. > :03:30.lord left off and say I think it's been an excellent debate. I'm

:03:31. > :03:33.grateful to both the noble Baroness Lady Smith for the way she

:03:34. > :03:38.introduced it all the contrhbutions that have been made today. Ht's been

:03:39. > :03:43.very constructive and in thd most part, I too have agreed with much

:03:44. > :03:50.that has been said. I hope that there is lots of common grotnd that

:03:51. > :03:57.we can find and progress as far as making sure that this House is well

:03:58. > :04:01.equipped to do its job. I whll of course come on to respond to some of

:04:02. > :04:07.the very important points that have been raised today. I just w`nted to

:04:08. > :04:11.start, if I may, just to make a few points from my perspective `s the

:04:12. > :04:19.person representing the Govdrnment here today in this debate. To say

:04:20. > :04:24.that as leader of this housd I'm of course appointed by the Prile

:04:25. > :04:27.Minister. I'm a member of hhs Cabinet and I'm responsible for the

:04:28. > :04:34.Government's business in thd House of Lords. As has been acknowledged,

:04:35. > :04:37.my party was democratically,elected and has a mandate to govern in line

:04:38. > :04:47.with the commitments in our manifesto. I know my Lords that to

:04:48. > :04:52.succeed in my job I have to listen to this House. I really unddrstand

:04:53. > :04:56.that. I don't just have to listen, sometimes I have to deliver

:04:57. > :05:01.difficult messages to my Cabinet colleagues. They don't alwaxs like

:05:02. > :05:07.what I've got to say, but I know that's my job. That's something that

:05:08. > :05:11.I have to do. I'm getting bdtter at that I think because they'rd getting

:05:12. > :05:17.more used to some of the thhngs I have to tell them. The point I would

:05:18. > :05:23.say to noble Lords is that the Prime Minister and all of the minhsters in

:05:24. > :05:28.the Government understand the importance of my role because they

:05:29. > :05:32.are members of parliament, too. They understand that for people to have

:05:33. > :05:36.confidence in the laws that parliament makes, parliament has an

:05:37. > :05:44.important role in the legislative process. As the noble Barondss

:05:45. > :05:49.acknowledged what I said during my response to the Gracious Spdech the

:05:50. > :05:54.other week, we also acknowlddge that parliament improves legislation

:05:55. > :06:01.That is part of what it does. But it's also true, of course, that from

:06:02. > :06:05.my perspective in Government, when I look at the picture from thd other

:06:06. > :06:10.end of the telescope that things do look a bit different sometiles from

:06:11. > :06:15.within Government. As my noble friend Lord Norton acknowledged

:06:16. > :06:18.since the last general election the balance of power has actually

:06:19. > :06:24.shifted more towards parlialent than has been the case for now ndarly 20

:06:25. > :06:30.years because the Government has such a small majority in thd House

:06:31. > :06:35.of Commons. We know of course that the Conservative Party in Government

:06:36. > :06:40.in this House has no majority whatsoever. The noble Barondss

:06:41. > :06:45.referred to the Opposition's approach in this House. I do

:06:46. > :06:49.acknowledge a lot of what she says, but it can't be ignored, as my noble

:06:50. > :06:55.friend, Lord Strathclyde sahd, in that first session of this

:06:56. > :07:00.parliament that the Governmdnt was defeated more than - on mord than

:07:01. > :07:06.half of the divisions that took place in your lordships US ho. That

:07:07. > :07:12.is significantly higher, I would say to the noble lord, than what was

:07:13. > :07:21.experienced when the Labour Party was in Government. As has bden

:07:22. > :07:26.acknowledged by many noble Lords in today's debate, we must recognise

:07:27. > :07:32.that the Government of the day is sustained through the confidence of

:07:33. > :07:36.the elected House. Though it is the Government who brings forward their

:07:37. > :07:40.legislation, the legislativd process itself is a conversation between the

:07:41. > :07:43.two Houses. So when we talk about balance of power, as has bedn

:07:44. > :07:47.acknowledged here today, we need to be mindful not just of the balance

:07:48. > :07:53.of power between Government and parliament, but also between the two

:07:54. > :07:57.Houses. And that balance of power does go both ways. Whilst it's

:07:58. > :08:01.absolutely right that we have the power and have the responsibilities

:08:02. > :08:06.sometimes in this House to `sk the other place to think again, at the

:08:07. > :08:10.same time, we musts also acknowledge when to take no for an answdr.

:08:11. > :08:15.Mediated by those conventions that underpin our work. I feel vdry

:08:16. > :08:34.strongly about that because I feel that that approach is what helps

:08:35. > :08:39.protect our of our house. That was made by our noble Lord Lang and

:08:40. > :08:46.other Lords who have spoken to today. I also relies on the

:08:47. > :08:49.Government upholding its responsibilities in ensuring that

:08:50. > :08:56.both Houses are able to scrttinise our legislation in full. I recognise

:08:57. > :09:01.that we as a Government havd a responsibility to make sure that

:09:02. > :09:05.parliament has the opportunhty to do its proper role in holding the

:09:06. > :09:11.Government to account and scrutinising our legislation.

:09:12. > :09:20.I appreciate what lies behind the concerns that have been raised. I

:09:21. > :09:25.will come onto some of the lore specific points being raised as far

:09:26. > :09:35.as second area legislation hn a moment, but I should also s`y that

:09:36. > :09:42.as a house, as much as we c`re very deeply about how we go about our

:09:43. > :09:46.work and scrutinising legislation, that we have made a bit of progress

:09:47. > :09:53.over recent years in some ndw innovations in the House. Wd have

:09:54. > :09:57.now got the post-legislativd scrutiny committees which h`ve been

:09:58. > :10:02.set up as part of our regimd of select committees. We have dnsured

:10:03. > :10:06.that there is more pre-legislative scrutiny in the last parlialent then

:10:07. > :10:12.there was in the one before and we have new things like topical QS Ds

:10:13. > :10:19.so there is more time for mdmbers of this House to scrutinise and hold

:10:20. > :10:23.the Government to account. But yes, sometimes governments don't always

:10:24. > :10:29.get it right and I know this one and previous governments have not always

:10:30. > :10:33.got it right and I have heard loud and clear, both today but also

:10:34. > :10:41.through other debates, that there are deep areas where noble Lords

:10:42. > :10:51.feel we must do better. On the topic of skeleton bills. Sometimes

:10:52. > :10:54.material is brought forward later than is desirable, as was the case

:10:55. > :11:01.with some material emerging after the election and yes I want to

:11:02. > :11:06.ensure that as Parliament proceeds, that Parliament has the information

:11:07. > :11:10.it needs to do its job. Havhng gone through one session, I feel there

:11:11. > :11:17.are lessons I have learnt, that I want to ensure properly applied as

:11:18. > :11:23.far as the Government is concerned, but the first session of a

:11:24. > :11:27.parliament is always a bit different to later sessions, because straight

:11:28. > :11:32.after an election, clearly the Government has got to get on

:11:33. > :11:36.implementing the commitment in its manifesto and some things rdquire it

:11:37. > :11:41.to get on sooner rather than later because if they have commitlents

:11:42. > :11:45.they have to deliver by the end of that Parliament and it requhres them

:11:46. > :11:51.to bring forward legislation early on, they need to get on. I have

:11:52. > :11:56.learnt lessons and I noted very much what the noble Baroness Taylor said

:11:57. > :12:03.about some of her experiencds when she was Chief Whip and ministers,

:12:04. > :12:09.and I sit on what we now call the public bill and legislative

:12:10. > :12:14.committee in government and certainly I think that my rdputation

:12:15. > :12:22.as a plain speaker as far as the ministers who bring forward their

:12:23. > :12:28.bills to that committee, I can assure noble Lords that I al taking

:12:29. > :12:34.very seriously my responsibhlities to ensure that legislation hs for

:12:35. > :12:39.forward in as complete a fashion as possible. The noble Baroness

:12:40. > :12:46.Ladysmith, as I say she madd many points with which I would agree and

:12:47. > :12:50.certainly share with her give you that this House has got to have the

:12:51. > :12:57.right information in order to do its job properly. I don't accept that we

:12:58. > :13:06.have not welcomed challenge because I do think ministers in this House

:13:07. > :13:12.have, I feel, engaged quite constructively with members of your

:13:13. > :13:17.lordship's house during the passage of bills. As far as yes there may

:13:18. > :13:27.have been a couple of bills which have not been as well as I would

:13:28. > :13:31.have liked, we did get 20 through -- get through 23 bills and by and

:13:32. > :13:41.large, most of them arrived here in great shape than might have been

:13:42. > :13:45.perhaps, I would argue that they would not necessarily have been in

:13:46. > :13:51.the shape as someone might have described them. We might have a

:13:52. > :13:57.difference of view on that, but skeleton bills are something, some

:13:58. > :14:02.of them arrived in that way for a purpose and the city 's bill was one

:14:03. > :14:10.which was designed in that way in order that we could properlx allowed

:14:11. > :14:15.the Government to enter into proper agreements with local authorities.

:14:16. > :14:20.Mention has been made of thd buses bill in the second session. That has

:14:21. > :14:24.been specifically designed hn that way, so I would not argue

:14:25. > :14:33.necessarily that all bills that are skeleton bills are bad becatse that

:14:34. > :14:39.is the way they have been prepared. As far as, moving onto the content

:14:40. > :14:43.of legislation and secondarx legislation and the number of

:14:44. > :14:47.statutory instruments and the use of Henry VIII powers. I would say on

:14:48. > :14:55.the numbers of statutory instruments, I cannot let go of the

:14:56. > :15:04.fact that in the last session that we have just completed, there was

:15:05. > :15:09.about 750 pieces of secondary legislation laid in parliamdnt and

:15:10. > :15:16.this is the lowest number 4/20 years and it compares very dramathcally to

:15:17. > :15:27.first sessions of previous governments over recent timds and, I

:15:28. > :15:33.mean we can move measurements if we like and start counting pagds, but I

:15:34. > :15:37.can't go back and count all the pages of pieces of secondarx

:15:38. > :15:44.legislation from 20 years ago, but as far as the numbers of secondary

:15:45. > :15:49.legislation, that is somethhng we have dramatically reduced. @s far as

:15:50. > :15:59.Hendry the eighth powers is concerned... We talk about process,

:16:00. > :16:07.SIs, what matters is what noble lady has not so far addressed is whether

:16:08. > :16:15.they are heavy duty SIs carrying policy load. Nobody has any

:16:16. > :16:22.objection to a number of SIs. It's whether they carry policy and put

:16:23. > :16:32.that policy beyond proper Parliamentary scrutiny. Getting to a

:16:33. > :16:39.debate about the detail, I lean I have looked at the content of

:16:40. > :16:46.secondary legislation and how in the last session this Government has

:16:47. > :16:52.performed alongside or against the governments that the noble Baroness

:16:53. > :16:57.was a member of. I can tradd if she likes a range of different dxamples

:16:58. > :17:02.of where previous governments were criticised for the use of sdcondary

:17:03. > :17:06.legislation inappropriately, but we are trying to move forward `nd I

:17:07. > :17:12.wanted to come next to the point that was raised about Henry VIII

:17:13. > :17:25.powers. I was pleased that the noble Baroness Lady Taylor said that she

:17:26. > :17:29.disagreed with Lord Judge. She is right to point out that it would be

:17:30. > :17:34.impossible for us to do without Henry VIII was as completelx, but

:17:35. > :17:38.that does not mean that Parliament should not be very watchful of the

:17:39. > :17:51.Government's use of Henry VHII powers. Thereafter some that are

:17:52. > :17:55.appropriate in terms of thehr use in appropriate circumstances. For

:17:56. > :18:03.instance, the one referred to in the children and social care act which

:18:04. > :18:09.is about to receive its second reading debate in this Housd. That

:18:10. > :18:19.is did designed specificallx for a purpose.

:18:20. > :18:26.I think we can have and shotld have a proper debate about these things

:18:27. > :18:32.but I would not necessarily argue that all of them are open to

:18:33. > :18:37.criticism just because they exist. As far as the points that wdre

:18:38. > :18:43.raised about my noble friend Lord Strathclyde's review of secondary

:18:44. > :18:46.legislation, as the House knows the Government has not yet responded and

:18:47. > :18:55.that was acknowledged by Lord Butler. We are still very mtch

:18:56. > :18:58.considering that report and all of the select committee reports

:18:59. > :19:04.alongside it. What we are trying to achieve, as my noble friend Lord

:19:05. > :19:11.Wakeham said, in looking at all of these things is making sure that we

:19:12. > :19:17.don't want this House to dilinish its influence whatsoever, btt what

:19:18. > :19:22.we need to ensure is that the elected house, the House of Commons

:19:23. > :19:27.has the final say on or leghslation and not just primary legisl`tion.

:19:28. > :19:33.It's a topic which I know wd will continue to discuss and consider and

:19:34. > :19:40.I note what my noble friend Lord Strathclyde said that about the

:19:41. > :19:48.existing or rather the convdntions that were so hotly disputed and I

:19:49. > :19:53.think the problem we have is that we do still have amongst us a lack of

:19:54. > :19:58.agreement as to where we ard as far as that convention is concerned

:19:59. > :20:09.right now. Of course that does not mean that we cannot seek cl`rity and

:20:10. > :20:12.agreement. Ladysmith made a number of constructive suggestions about

:20:13. > :20:19.steps that can be taken to `ddress these matters which, as I s`y, I

:20:20. > :20:24.think we are all agreed as far as the importance of what we are trying

:20:25. > :20:30.to achieve. We all agreed in what it is we want to see this Housd do

:20:31. > :20:35.which is to continue its very porter role of scrutinising legisl`tion,

:20:36. > :20:39.revising and also holding the Government to account. I will

:20:40. > :20:44.reflect very carefully on some of her specific proposals. In some of

:20:45. > :20:51.the issues she raises like the Cabinet Office guidance, dr`ft

:20:52. > :20:55.breaks prior to committee, ` lot of this is what should happen `nd a lot

:20:56. > :21:03.of that means that for me to take away and think, the process is

:21:04. > :21:07.there. I need to ensure that the Government understands its

:21:08. > :21:12.responsibilities in preceding and fulfilling its responsibilities As

:21:13. > :21:18.far as her idea about a particular committee to look more broadly at

:21:19. > :21:25.how we prepare for legislathon and our various scrutiny procedtres

:21:26. > :21:35.clearly I will reflect on that as well. What I feel more than anything

:21:36. > :21:41.is that I want to conclude by reinforcing to your lordships just

:21:42. > :21:47.how much I share with you in the objective of trying to make sure

:21:48. > :21:53.this House is able to do wh`t it exists to do. Like all nobld Lords

:21:54. > :21:58.who have spoken today, we all feel very passionately about the purpose

:21:59. > :22:06.of this House. For me, nobld Lords have heard me say many times, the

:22:07. > :22:10.way I describe it is this House exists to give public confidence in

:22:11. > :22:16.the laws that Parliament makes. I want to make sure we are always

:22:17. > :22:19.equipped to do that and I whll take away the constructive comments and

:22:20. > :22:28.contributions made today. I will carefully read the Hansard `gain. I

:22:29. > :22:33.am very grateful to the noble Baroness for her introduction to

:22:34. > :22:38.this debate and for everythhng that she has said today, about mx

:22:39. > :22:42.ministerial team and their dfforts to respond constructively to the

:22:43. > :22:48.scrutiny that is given to the Government's legislation, and I

:22:49. > :22:52.thank all noble Lords for their contribution as well. Can I thank

:22:53. > :22:57.the noble lady. She made sole very constructive points. I thank all

:22:58. > :23:05.noble Lords who have contributed and listen to the debates today. I think

:23:06. > :23:08.it is a very impressive deb`te and shows why this House should have a

:23:09. > :23:15.greater role inscription sqtid live nation. I have never intenddd it to

:23:16. > :23:20.be all about Lord Strathclyde's report as we try to head thd

:23:21. > :23:30.direction of thought from your lordship's house. That support we

:23:31. > :23:38.have had for the proposals put forward, they welcome. I dotbt agree

:23:39. > :23:43.that the conventions are broken I don't know how many times I have to

:23:44. > :23:53.say this but we abide by thd conventions of your lordship's

:23:54. > :24:00.house. I do think that detr`cts from the observance of the conventions

:24:01. > :24:07.from around the House. The proposal from my noble friend Lady Hollis was

:24:08. > :24:15.intended to be helpful. We did not support a faithful motion. @lthough

:24:16. > :24:20.had we done so, it would not have broken the conventions. The House

:24:21. > :24:25.was seeking a way to be helpful to the Government. My grandmother had a

:24:26. > :24:29.saying, no good deed goes unpunished. Given that it ldd to the

:24:30. > :24:45.Strathclyde review, I wish H could tell her how right she was.

:24:46. > :24:56.Yes, that was around 60 votds. Exactly the same as during the 001,

:24:57. > :25:02.200... Don't shake your head at me. The noble Lord wants his

:25:03. > :25:06.percentages. Around 60 votes. The reason why percentages aren't

:25:07. > :25:11.valuable here is because thhs House, knowing the arithmetic of the house,

:25:12. > :25:15.does not vote nearly as oftdn as it did when the noble Lord Str`thclyde

:25:16. > :25:20.was the Leader of the Opposhtion. We exercise the restraint that

:25:21. > :25:27.Government so graefs. We vote less often, if we win the same ntmber of

:25:28. > :25:31.votes - if you want us to go for division lobbies that can bd done.

:25:32. > :25:36.That's not the way to do thhngs Let's just look at exactly what

:25:37. > :25:42.we're talking about, not colpare apples and oranges. The othdr issue

:25:43. > :25:46.around the number of votes H think is the quality of the votes and the

:25:47. > :25:51.issues. The Labour Government lost issues around national security

:25:52. > :25:54.Some of the votes that we voted on where this House took a different

:25:55. > :26:01.view to the Government was to set up a joint committee to look at whether

:26:02. > :26:04.or not the Government's proposals, English votes foreningish l`ws could

:26:05. > :26:10.be examined to see if they had an impact of the House. The Government

:26:11. > :26:15.class that as a defeat. I class it as a victory. The Select Colmittee,

:26:16. > :26:17.the trade union bill, which assisted this House issing something the

:26:18. > :26:21.Government opposed. Have yot to look at the quality of the votes as well.

:26:22. > :26:25.I make no apologies for those results that we have won votes on. I

:26:26. > :26:31.also say we have examiner countriesed restraint. We vote less

:26:32. > :26:34.than half the many time as the Commons, fewer times than

:26:35. > :26:40.oppositions have in the past. I think the noble lady made the point

:26:41. > :26:44.about statutory instruments. I didn't raise the issue of the number

:26:45. > :26:47.of statutory it instruments this parliament or last parliament

:26:48. > :26:54.debated. That wasn't part of the argument I was making in. In

:26:55. > :26:58.legislation now we are having a greater use of delegated powers than

:26:59. > :27:01.we have had before. If you look at the bills that have gone through.

:27:02. > :27:06.She acknowledged this. Therd seems to be a far greater use of delegated

:27:07. > :27:11.powers for issues that are policy issues and not the normal uprating

:27:12. > :27:18.issues. Tax credit is an ex`mple. It should have been legislation not a

:27:19. > :27:23.statutory instrument. I havdn't counted the pages. I think ht's the

:27:24. > :27:28.significance and the policy matters that do cause this House concern. I

:27:29. > :27:32.was grateful to her when shd said she acknowledged, as I did, in the

:27:33. > :27:35.first session of any parm any session of Parliament, it's

:27:36. > :27:40.difficult times to have leghslation fully formed. I acknowledged that in

:27:41. > :27:44.my comments. We are in the second-session of this Parlhament we

:27:45. > :27:50.have a buses bill and a children's social work bill. Her comments were

:27:51. > :27:53.helpful if she could take that rigour to the House to look at those

:27:54. > :28:00.two bills. We would be gratdful and appreciate that. There was `n

:28:01. > :28:08.interesting contribution. Hd may not think I will agree with him, I am.

:28:09. > :28:10.He said veto or voting against, declining to accept a statutory

:28:11. > :28:18.instrument should be used in exceptional circumstances. H think

:28:19. > :28:22.in six times since 1950 werd motioned were accepted by this

:28:23. > :28:27.house, something like 150 thmes they have been rejected when tabled, that

:28:28. > :28:29.does seem to they are only being used in very exceptional

:28:30. > :28:37.circumstances. I think it's fair we have that. My Lords, the other point

:28:38. > :28:41.the noble lady made was abott making sure impact assessments are

:28:42. > :28:46.available and draft regulathons for committee. Don't take the btrden on

:28:47. > :28:52.herself. I'm grateful she whll do more than the bills coming to House

:28:53. > :28:55.we had situations where the bills have been through their Comlons

:28:56. > :29:00.stages and come this House `nd we still haven't had that information

:29:01. > :29:03.available. She needs to eng`ge with her Cabinet colleagues that at the

:29:04. > :29:07.other end of the building they are making sure that information is

:29:08. > :29:13.available when bills are debated in the other place. Today's debate has

:29:14. > :29:17.been instructive. It's been impressive for your lordships house.

:29:18. > :29:20.I'm grateful for the support and will go away and think further about

:29:21. > :29:26.the comments that have been made. I think we need to perhaps up our game

:29:27. > :29:32.on scrutiny to he ensure we always have the correct information. There

:29:33. > :29:37.was the point on the Henry VIII powers they may have extenddd too

:29:38. > :29:42.far into the future on some occasions. If we can move the

:29:43. > :29:46.tensions that come about not because of policy debates, but lack of

:29:47. > :29:50.information, our debates and discussions will be a Mott lore I

:29:51. > :29:52.think constructive and helpful, both for Government ministers who are

:29:53. > :29:55.struggling because they havd not been given a fully #230r78d policy

:29:56. > :30:02.and those struggling to get that information. I'm grateful to your

:30:03. > :30:10.lordships house. I'm grateftl for the comments the noble lady has

:30:11. > :30:16.made. I beg leave to withdr`w. THE SPEAKER: The question is this

:30:17. > :30:18.motion be agreed to? As manx of that opinion say content. Contrary not

:30:19. > :30:55.content. The contents have ht. My Lords, I'd like to thank noble

:30:56. > :31:00.lords speaking in today's ddbate, especially appreciated as the timing

:31:01. > :31:04.is not what we originally expected. Before I start, before I get into

:31:05. > :31:07.the heart today's debate about dietary advice, let me start with

:31:08. > :31:12.the basics and the seriousndss of the current situation. Obeshty and

:31:13. > :31:19.its related illnesses is costing the country a fortune and it is not

:31:20. > :31:23.sustainable. Only this week Simon Stevens, Chief Executive of the NHS,

:31:24. > :31:27.told the Health Select Commhttee we are now spending more on

:31:28. > :31:33.obesity-related conditions than on our police or Fire Services. US

:31:34. > :31:38.figures released yesterday show that 40% of women in the States `re obese

:31:39. > :31:43.and we're not far behind. On current trends three in four adults will be

:31:44. > :31:48.overweight or obese in 20 ydars time. If we don't wake up to the

:31:49. > :31:54.extent of this crisis, the NHS could end up bankrupt. Already enormous

:31:55. > :31:57.amounts of money are spent on treating diseases which are entirely

:31:58. > :32:02.preventable. After my questhon on this topic a couple of weeks ago, a

:32:03. > :32:07.severely disabled friend told me how frustrated he felt that bec`use of

:32:08. > :32:10.the costs of obesity there hs much less money available for thd needs

:32:11. > :32:17.of people like him who have no control over their condition. The

:32:18. > :32:22.problem is that we in the wdstern world live in an obese socidty, one

:32:23. > :32:26.that tends to cause obesity. For almost all of us food is re`dily

:32:27. > :32:30.available. Most of us never feel hunger, our lives are incre`singly

:32:31. > :32:35.sedentary compared to gener`tions before us. It's all too easx to put

:32:36. > :32:40.on weight and maintaining a healthy weight is also a challenge. If we

:32:41. > :32:45.see someone slim today we assume them to be a person of real

:32:46. > :32:52.self-discipline. I declare `n interest. Six years ago I w`s 2 llbs

:32:53. > :32:55.heavier. My Lords, I was fat. I disliked it, but seemed unable to do

:32:56. > :33:00.anything about it. Like millions of others I tried every diet going

:33:01. > :33:11.back to grapefruit and hard boiled eggs, which I think was a 1870s fad.

:33:12. > :33:14.Ration coupons we have never been as healthy as we have been durhng

:33:15. > :33:21.rationing. You name it, I grabbed it. I gripped it thanks to Louise

:33:22. > :33:27.Parker I recommend her common sense set out in her book Lean for Life.

:33:28. > :33:32.If you put two or three str`ngers together, definitely women, the

:33:33. > :33:36.topic is an immediate icebrdaker. How to lose it. How to keep it off.

:33:37. > :33:43.What tips do you have, what works for you? A source of endless

:33:44. > :33:49.fascination. 1llb of fat ekwalts to 3,500 calories. If consume `n extra

:33:50. > :33:55.100 calories a day, just ond small glass of wine, for example, you will

:33:56. > :34:01.put on 10llbs a year. 20llbs in two years. All too easy. It can work the

:34:02. > :34:08.other way round. Cut out th`t daily glass of wine and all things being

:34:09. > :34:13.equal you will lose 10llbs hn a year. How is it possible thdre is

:34:14. > :34:17.still no calorie labelling on alcoholic drinks? I read of an

:34:18. > :34:21.experiment where two groups of people spent an evening out at the

:34:22. > :34:26.pub. One group had calories included on their drinks menu and consumed an

:34:27. > :34:38.average of 380 calories. Thd other didn't and drank the equiff lent of

:34:39. > :34:41.764. Double the amount. One pina colada is 245 calories,

:34:42. > :34:46.approximately the same as a Mars Bar. How many people know that? Or

:34:47. > :34:50.that a pint of beer and a p`ct of crisps contain a similar nulber of

:34:51. > :34:54.calories. It's not uncommon for people to drink two or thred

:34:55. > :34:58.cocktails or large glasses of wine or have three pints on a night out

:34:59. > :35:02.would they necessarily eat two or three chocolate bars or pacts of

:35:03. > :35:10.crisps? People want this information and it should be made transparently

:35:11. > :35:14.available. We currently spend ? million every hour on Type 2

:35:15. > :35:25.diabetes. If the number of people increases at the present rate, 00

:35:26. > :35:30.new dying people every day. Half of these people have diabetic

:35:31. > :35:33.complicationings, be heart disease, eye disease, kidney disease and 100

:35:34. > :35:39.amputations a week as a restlt of vascular disease in people with

:35:40. > :35:43.diabetes. Unsustainable. Thd good news is it doesn't have to be this

:35:44. > :35:46.way. Earlier this week we hdard of mounting evidence to show that

:35:47. > :35:56.losing weight is the best w`y to fight cancer. A daily brisk walk of

:35:57. > :36:00.just 25 minutes was shown to have to almost halve mortality for breast

:36:01. > :36:05.cancer sufferers. A waist lhne larger than 35 inches incre`sed

:36:06. > :36:08.death rates by a third. It lay be an added incentive by some, assuming

:36:09. > :36:15.doctors are aware and pass on the information. My Lords, should the

:36:16. > :36:19.messages be clearer and tougher A friend of mine lost five stone when

:36:20. > :36:23.his doctor made it clear he was unlikely to see his daughters grow

:36:24. > :36:26.to adulthood. Some may disagree with this approach, but it worked for

:36:27. > :36:33.him. In the interests of research for this debate I watched a few

:36:34. > :36:38.programmes over the weekend. Junk Food Kids - absolutely traghc. Those

:36:39. > :36:42.poor children, multiple teeth extractions because they ard

:36:43. > :36:45.drinking fizzy drinks and fruit juices instead of milk or w`ter are

:36:46. > :36:50.have dreadful diets and takd no activity. I also watched a couple of

:36:51. > :36:54.episodes of Lose Weight for Love, which is currently on the tdlevision

:36:55. > :36:59.where obese couples who are locked into cycles of overeating, with I

:37:00. > :37:04.threaten their relationships as well as their health, are separated from

:37:05. > :37:08.their partners to learn better habits on their own but supported by

:37:09. > :37:13.a team of experts. Issue for them is more than food. It's their psych

:37:14. > :37:18.lodgecle relationship with food The series has taken a holistic approach

:37:19. > :37:24.to diet change and weightenhng mament by offering sigh loghcal

:37:25. > :37:28.therapy alongside behaviour`l diet and exercise interventions. This

:37:29. > :37:33.joint up thinking doesn't h`ppen in healthcare. For long-term change to

:37:34. > :37:36.occur we need to understand why food is used so often to self

:37:37. > :37:40.of-medicate. All of these couples have lost substantial amounts of

:37:41. > :37:45.weight and appear to be mothvated to keep it off. One year later, one

:37:46. > :37:50.couple have lost six stone dach I think every single one of them

:37:51. > :37:54.admitted before the programle they drank litres of fizzy sugarx drinks

:37:55. > :37:59.every day which provided no nutritional value at all. Elpty

:38:00. > :38:03.liquid calories. I commend the Government for taxing it. At the

:38:04. > :38:06.same time as introducing thd tax they really need a publicitx

:38:07. > :38:12.campaign about what sugar does to your body. It seems to me as a

:38:13. > :38:17.layman quite right sugar has become the dietary enemy number ond along

:38:18. > :38:23.with processed snacks. I was pass inabilitied by the Guardians long

:38:24. > :38:27.read - the sugar Conspiracy, published on the 7th April. I

:38:28. > :38:34.remember the sugar smart app as an easy way of checking the amount of

:38:35. > :38:40.sugar in any product. Althotgh losing weight is simple, it's not

:38:41. > :38:46.easy. Giving up sugar is difficult. I could happily go home this evening

:38:47. > :38:51.and eat a tub of ice-cream `nd a pact of chocolate biscuits. I won't,

:38:52. > :38:54.once upon a time I might have. I'm motivated by concerns about my

:38:55. > :38:59.long-term health. Whilst I appreciate they are not full proof I

:39:00. > :39:04.try and live by the accepted golden rules for a healthy, cancer,free

:39:05. > :39:09.life. No smoking, limited alcohol, healthy weight and regular dxercise.

:39:10. > :39:15.I wonder should the Governmdnt be looking at carp rots, I mean not the

:39:16. > :39:20.vegetables, for those achieve those goals and thereby potentially save a

:39:21. > :39:27.lot for our overstretched hdalth service? The current dietarx advice

:39:28. > :39:34.is confusing. For example, the Eat Well guide recommends basing meets

:39:35. > :39:40.on potatoes, bread, rice, p`sta or other carbohydrates? Are we sure

:39:41. > :39:44.this is good advice? We feed tampy crops to animals to fatten them why

:39:45. > :39:49.wouldn't it have the same affect on us? For years we were told not to

:39:50. > :39:53.eat more than two egg as wedk. Research show could lest roll in

:39:54. > :39:57.eggs had almost no affect on blood cholesterol. The consequencd of this

:39:58. > :40:04.advice was that egg producers went out of business and the poptlation

:40:05. > :40:12.missed out on affordable, n`tural, nutrient fuelled food as it swapped

:40:13. > :40:18.it for sugar laden industri`lly produced ceals. Muddled messages

:40:19. > :40:23.help nobody. So for the sakd of our NHS, our nation, and our poor chubby

:40:24. > :40:27.children I urge the Governmdnt to focus on accuracy and clarity when

:40:28. > :40:52.they finally publish their obesity strategy. Well done.

:40:53. > :40:56.Subtitles will resume at 11.00pm with Today in Parliament.