On 13 June, Members of the House of Lords are due to consider a ‘fatal’ motion, aimed at killing the Government’s controversial draft regulations that would lower the threshold of what constitutes ‘serious disruption’ by protestors. However, the legislation, procedures and events in Parliament are complex and confusing. This event outlined exactly what’s going on.
[Closed] 12:30pm, 9 June 2023 Online (Zoom) and hosted by Blackstone Chambers
Tom Hickman KC Barrister, Blackstone Chambers; and Professor of Public Law, UCL
Ruth Fox Director, Hansard Society
Questions can be submitted to our speakers throughout the event via the Zoom app, and we encourage you to send them through.
Earlier this year the Government attempted to lower the threshold for whether a procession or assembly is likely to cause “serious disruption” to community life via a late amendment to the Public Order Bill 2023. The amendment came about at a time of heightened concern about public protests by organisations such as Insulate Britain and Just Stop Oil.
The amendment was rejected by the House of Lords. But just weeks later the same proposal was repackaged by the Government and put to Parliament again in the form of a Statutory Instrument which cannot be amended by Parliament and generally attracts less parliamentary scrutiny than a Bill. The Minister was able to do this by using a ‘Henry VIII’ power in an Act of Parliament passed in 1986.
But the Government’s legislative manoeuvre did not pass unnoticed. A House of Lords committee, tasked with scrutinising SIs, brought the proposed regulations to the wider attention of Parliament in a critical report published on 11 May. It said it was unaware of any previous example of a Government bringing back a policy via a Statutory Instrument that had recently been rejected by Parliament during passage of a Bill. Concerned Members of the House of Lords have subsequently tabled two motions for consideration on 13 June, including one ‘fatal’ motion aimed at rejecting it outright.
Due to the implications of the SI for public protest and the constitutional controversy surrounding the Government’s legislative tactics, the forthcoming Lords debates have attracted considerable attention from campaign groups, the press and across social media. But as the conversation has grown, so has the confusion surrounding what has actually happened, and what Parliament can do about it.
Still here? Some of the legal and procedural detail is complex. If you find all of this slightly baffling, but want a firmer grasp on exactly what is going on in Parliament including how events may play out on 13 June then this event is for you. You will also have the opportunity to submit questions to our expert speakers via the Zoom app, and we encourage you to do so.
What has happened in Parliament so far surrounding the Public Order Statutory Instrument (SI)?
What’s the relationship between the Public Order Act 2023, the Public Order Act 1986 and the SI in question?
What procedures apply to the SI and what do they mean for parliamentary scrutiny?
Why is going to happen in the House of Lords on 13 June? What is being debated? What are ‘fatal’ and ‘non-fatal’ motions? And what are the possible and likely outcomes?
Why is this issue constitutionally important and what does it mean for parliamentary democracy?
In our latest ‘Whipping Yarn’, we talk with Simon Hart, former Conservative Chief Whip during Rishi Sunak’s Premiership. Hart opens up about his time in one of Westminster’s most demanding and discreet roles, chronicled in his new book, ‘Ungovernable: The Political Diaries of a Chief Whip’.
If a crisis or major national event occurs during a period when Parliament is adjourned, there are often demands from MPs, the media and the public for Parliament to be ‘recalled’. But the House of Commons Standing Orders stipulate that only Government Ministers - in reality, the Prime Minister - can ask the Speaker to recall the House. In recent years the House of Lords has generally been recalled at the same time as the House of Commons.
In response to the Modernisation Committee's call for views on 17 October 2024, we submitted evidence outlining key areas we believe the Committee should prioritise. Our submission recommended a focus on: strengthening legislative scrutiny, with particular emphasis on reforming the delegated legislation system; enhancing financial scrutiny, especially in relation to the Budget and the Estimates; addressing strategic gaps in parliamentary scrutiny; making more effective use of parliamentary time; and reviewing the Standing Orders, language and rituals of the House of Commons.
This briefing explains what to watch for during the Second Reading debate of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill on 29 November. It outlines the procedural and legislative issues that will come into play: the role of the Chair in managing the debate and how procedures such as the 'closure' and 'reasoned amendments' work. It looks ahead to the Committee and Report stage procedures that will apply if the Bill progresses beyond Second Reading. It also examines the government's responsibilities, such as providing a money resolution for the Bill and preparing an Impact Assessment, while addressing broader concerns about the adequacy of Private Members’ Bill procedures for scrutinising controversial issues.
In this ninth instalment of our special mini-podcast series, we continue to explore the latest developments in the progress of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, often referred to as the assisted dying bill. We are joined by Dr Marie Tidball MP to discuss the amendments she has secured for a Disability Advisory Board and an independent advocate for people with learning disabilities.
