|
Major Threat To Democracy - LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY REFORM BILL
Download Updated Lobby Document Here
Legal experts are warning that Tony Blair is trying to grab unprecedented powers to make sweeping changes to the law without the approval of MPs.
This Bill has been cynically published under the banner of reducing red tape!
An eminent group of lawyers said the Government wants to be able to rewrite almost any piece of legislation without any reference or accountability to Parliament.
This means that, ministers would be able to change such legislation as divorce laws, introduce house arrest, curtail or abolish jury trial and give police powers to detain individuals, with no vote or discussion by the House of Commons, the Cambridge academics said.
The change will infuriate MPs who believe Mr Blair has sought to marginalise Parliament.
John Spencer, professor of law at Cambridge University, said the Government is planning a 'major shift of power' which in any other country would require an amendment to the constitution.
Ministers are insistent that the only aim of their little noticed LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY REFORM BILL is to cut red tape by amending legislation quickly.
But Professor Spencer said it would hand ministers the right to amend any Act of Parliament and, in some cases, enact laws that currently only Parliament can make.
He was one of six Cambridge academics who voiced concern in a letter to The Times. (Annex 1)
The others were Professor Sir John Baker, Professor David Feldman, Professor Christopher Forsyth, Professor David Ibbetson and Professor David Williams, all members of the university's law faculty.
They said: 'We hope MPs on all sides of the House will recognise the dangers of what is being proposed before it is too late.'
The Conservatives warn that the powers could also be used to introduce unpopular EU social and employment policies by the back door.
Ministers will not be allowed to impose taxes and Labour claims that the new powers will not be used for 'highly controversial' matters.
But, it is those ministers themselves would be the sole arbiter of what was controversial and there is nothing in the Bill that would prevent the powers being abused by any future government.
Professor Spencer said: 'There are very few safeguards.’
The Bill will allow ministers to reform legislation or introduce recommendations of the Law Commission -a body which suggests updates to the law ‘by order'.
The Commission's current proposals include giving those who have lived together the same rights as married couples when they separate.
A small number of MPs on a select committee would be allowed to scrutinise the orders and suggest changes, but the orders would not go to the floor of the Commons.
And Blair and his acolytes have demonstrated their contempt for the likes of select committees.
Tory constitutional affairs spokesman Oliver Heald said: 'This is a recipe for sloppy law-making, as well as a threat to liberty.'
Conservative MP Grant Shapps, a member of the Commons Public Administration Committee, said: 'It is a naked power grab by the executive, ultimately by Tony Blair.'
Westminster's longest serving member, Labour MP Alan Williams, said cutting MPs out of lawmaking would 'result in injustice for people who are at the receiving end'.
The Bill is cynically dressed up as being part of the simplification of government and reduction of red tape in the attempt to make it more palatable.
MAG and any other organisation or individuals who value freedoms, hard won through the centuries of this country, should be acting and objecting to this dangerous Bill.
"Who wants the Abolition of Parliament Bill?" Times Online 21st February Here [1]
The article carries news of a Bill before Parliament, the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill 2006. The Bill seeks to extend the powers of Ministers to make, change or repeal legislation with minimal reference to the House.
David Howarth writes, "Ministers will have to face at most a short debate in a committee and a one-and-a-half hour debate on the floor.
Frequently the Government will face less than that. No amendments will be allowed. The legislative process will be reduced to a game of take-it-or-leave-it."
The Bill is online at the Government's website: Here [2] and it makes frightening reading.
Here is a brief summary of the most important parts:
1 (1) A Minister of the Crown may by order make provision for ... the following purposes:
(a) Reforming legislation ....
2 (1) An order ... may ... make provision amending,repealing or replacing any legislation.
2 (2) Provision under subsection (1) may amend, repeal or replace legislation in any way that an Act might, and in particular may amend, repeal or replace legislation so as to:
(a) Confer functions on any person (including functions of legislating or functions relating to the charging of fees);
(b) Modify the functions conferred on any person by legislation;
(c) Transfer, or provide for the transfer or delegation of, the functions conferred on any person by legislation.
(3) An order under section 1 may for the purpose specified in subsection (1)(b) of that section also make:
(a) Provision amending or abolishing any rule of law including common law;
(b) Provision codifying rules of law.
(4) An order under section 1 may make such consequential, supplementary, incidental or transitional provision (including provision amending, repealing or replacing any legislation or other provision) as the Minister making it considers appropriate.
(5) An order under section 1 may bind the Crown.
Section 11 requires Ministers to consult organisations that "appear to him to be representative" of interests in the Bill and "consult such other persons as he considers appropriate."
So, if it doesn't "appear" to the Minister that an organisation is representative, or if it does not seem "appropriate" to him to consult, he's under no obligation to do so.
Where does this leave MAG?
Well, it might be argued by a Minister that as only a few thousands of motorcyclists see fit to join MAG, it is not really representative and so it would not be appropriate to consult us about ... what?
Leg protectors, air-bags, power restrictions, banning off-road use at all, banning biking (Vision Zero)!
MAG is a political organisation based upon democratic principals that lie at the heart of our polity.
The Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill 2006 is, in my opinion, a direct attack on our Democracy which, could conceivably lead to loss of yet more of our freedoms.
We know there are people who are implacably opposed to motorcycling and that from time to time they are in positions of power in the Government, it would only need for one of those to become a Minister for us to see our chosen lifestyle, transport, and sport being rendered illegal without any debate.
MAG members should lobby their MPs about this bill and call for its complete removal, not a watered-down version, simply removed from Parliament's calendar.
SEND A LETTER TO YOUR MP NOW!
To give you an idea the sample letter below should be used as a guide when drafting your letters, remember standard letters can get ignored.
For maximum impact every letter needs to be personal.
Name
Address
Phone:
Email:
Date
Re: Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill
Dear Your MP,
It has just been brought to my attention that the "Legislative and Regulatory Reform bill" is not as billed.
I previously understood it to be a piece of enabling legislation to ease the simplification of regulations.
I now understand that a number of highly respected legal experts have grave concerns about the safety of this bill.
Professor Spencer said it would hand ministers the right to amend any Act of Parliament and, in some cases, enact laws that currently only Parliament can make.
He was one of six Cambridge academics who voiced concern in a letter to The Times.
The others were Professor Sir John Baker, Professor David Feldman, Professor Christopher Forsyth, Professor David Ibbetson and Professor David Williams, all members of the university's law faculty.
They said: 'We hope MPs on all sides of the House will recognise the dangers of what is being proposed before it is too late.'
The Conservatives warn that the powers could also be used to introduce unpopular EU social and employment policies by the back door.
Ministers will not be allowed to impose taxes and Labour claims that the new powers will not be used for 'highly controversial' matters.
But, it is those ministers themselves would be the sole arbiter of what was controversial and there is nothing in the Bill that would prevent the powers being abused by any future government.
Professor Spencer said: 'There are very few safeguards.'
The Bill will allow ministers to reform legislation or introduce recommendations of the Law Commission -a body which suggests updates to the law ‘by order'.
A small number of MPs on a select committee would be allowed to scrutinise the orders and suggest changes, but the orders would not go to the floor of the Commons.
Several Conservative MPs have registered their concerns, I hope that you will agree with them and do your best to squash this cynically re-badged power grab.
Yours sincerely,
Contact Links
To find out who your MP is and their contact details go to: www.locata.co.uk/commons
If your MP has an email address you should be able to email them direct from the Constituency Locata website above.
Or write to them at:
The House of Commons London SW1A OAA.
Main MPs and Government to contact if you are in their constituency are the members of the standing committee for the Bill these are:
Standing Committee A membership
Ian Austin – Labour
Gordon Banks – Labour
Douglas Carswell – Conservative
Christopher Chope -Conservative
Rosie Cooper -Labour
Parmjit Dhanda -Assistant Government Whip
Mark Harper – Conservative
Oliver Heald -Conservative Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster
David Heath -Liberal Democrat Shadow Leader of the House and Constitutional Affairs spokesperson
Meg Hillier – Labour
Sharon Hodgson – Labour
David Howarth -Liberal Democrat Communities and Local Government Spokesperson
Barbara Keeley -Labour
Andrew Love -Labour
Jim Murphy -Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office
Alison Seabeck – Labour
Angela Watkinson -Conservative Whip
Please forward replies to
Trevor Baird Director Of Public Affairs
MAG UK
PO Box 750
Rugby
CV21 3ZR
public-affairs@mag-uk.org
References
Document contents prepared by MAG Activists -Stuart Duckworth, Andy Meredith, Archi Hipkins.
ANNEX 1
The Legislative Reform Bill 2006 (Stuart Duckworth MAG Bristol)
I make no apology for quoting in its entirety this letter to the Times newspaper of February 16th 2006.
The letter is about a law that, if passed, could pave the way for a Minister who is minded to do it, to ban our chosen lifestyle, sport or means of transport.
The Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill, if passed, will allow Ministers to make, amend or repeal laws with hardly any reference to parliament.
You can read the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill at the Government’s website [3]
The Cambridge professors’ letter is on the Times website [4] and there’s an article by David Howarth MP [5] also on the Times website.
If you’ve never written to your MP before, do it about this because it’s not only bikers who may suffer if this law is passed: it would “create a major shift of power within the state, which in other countries would require an amendment to the constitution.” You could find other aspects of your life changed by a Government unfettered by Parliamentary scrutiny.
Legislative Reform
Sir, Clause one of the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill (Comment, Feb 15) provides that: “A Minister of the Crown may by order make provision for either or both of the following purposes.
a) reforming legislation;
b) implementing recommendations of any one or more of the United Kingdom Law Commissions, with or without changes.”
This has been presented as a simple measure “streamlining” the Regulatory Reform Act 2001, by which, to help industry, the Government can reduce red tape by amending the Acts of Parliament that wove it.
But it goes much further: if passed, the Government could rewrite almost any Act and, in some cases, enact new laws that at present only Parliament can make.
The Bill subjects this drastic power to limits, but these are few and weak. If enacted as it stands, we believe the Bill would make it possible for the Government, by delegated legislation, to do (inter alia) the following:
# create a new offence of incitement to religious hatred, punishable with two years’ imprisonment;
# curtail or abolish jury trial;
# permit the Home Secretary to place citizens under house arrest;
# allow the Prime Minister to sack judges;
# rewrite the law on nationality and immigration;
# “reform” Magna Carta (or what remains of it).
It would, in short, create a major shift of power within the state, which in other countries would require an amendment to the constitution; and one in which the winner would be the executive, and the loser Parliament.
David Howarth, MP for Cambridge, made this point at the Second Reading of the Bill last week.
We hope that other MPs, on all sides of the House, will recognise the dangers of what is being proposed before it is too late.
PROFESSOR CHRISTOPHER FORSYTH
PROFESSOR DAVID IBBETSON
PROFESSOR J. R. SPENCER, QC
PROFESSOR SIR DAVID WILLIAMS, QC
PROFESSOR SIR JOHN BAKER, QC
PROFESSOR DAVID FELDMAN
Law Faculty, University of Cambridge
[1] http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,6-2049791,00.html
[2] http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmbills/111/06111.1-4.html
[3] http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmbills/111/06111.1-4.html
[4] http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,59-2042165,00.html
[5] http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,6-2049791,00.html
|
