Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill
Constitutional reform and governance bill
Tomorrows crunch vote on the Constitutional Renewal Bill will determine the course of electoral reform for years ahead. |  |
The Electoral Reform Society is a voluntary organisation that campaigns for a better democracy, particularly through changes to our electoral system.
| |
Find more Opinion Formers in this category:
A man was beaten up by BNP men after he spilled a drink on party leader Nick Griffin, an MP has claimed. |  |
Thursday is an opportunity to vote for change in Norwich North and Westminster. |  |
Friday, 24, Jul 2009 12:00
Status of the bill: In Progress
Main purpose of the bill: "The constitutional reform and governance bill aims to rebuild trust in our democratic and constitutional settlement by ensuring openness, transparency, and accountability."
Main points of the bill:
Phases out the hereditary principle in the House of Lords by ending by-elections for hereditary peers.
Allows members of the House of Lords to resign.
*Provides for peers convicted of a serious crime or subject to a bankruptcy restriction order to be disqualified from the House of Lords.
*Gives the House of Lords powers to expel or suspend peers found guilty of misconduct.
*Controversy
The Hansard Society welcomed proposals to allow for the eviction of peers, but warned that this measure alone would not be enough to address public concerns about standards and conduct in the Upper House.
Dr Ruth Fox, director of the Hansard Society's parliament and government programme, said: "Sanctions to evict peers are just one half of the equation. There are two important reviews currently underway regarding the House of Lords' expenses and allowances system and the Peers Code of Conduct. There must be a commitment on all sides of the House to implement the recommendations of these reviews as well. The Code of Conduct in particular will help define what is unacceptable behaviour and therefore where sanctions will be needed."
The Joint Committee on Human Rights, in its report of January 2010, suggested that the provisions relating to the removal, expulsion and suspension of members of the House of Lords "raise a difficult issue about the relationship between common law fairness and parliamentary privilege." The JCHR stated: "Members are entitled to be treated fairly, but the House of Lords is entitled to set its own procedure. We accept that the procedures adopted by the House of Lords in its new Code of Conduct satisfy the common law requirements of fairness."
*Places the Civil Service, the Civil Service Commissioners and the Civil Service Code on a statutory footing.
*Provides a modern governance arrangement for the National Audit Office and changes the tenure of the Comptroller and Auditor General.
*Controversy
The JCHR was concerned about provisions in the bill relating to the removal from office of the Civil Service Commissioners; complaints about breaches of the Codes of Conduct by civil servants; complaints about selections for appointment to the civil service; and removal from office of the Comptroller and Auditor General and the chair of the National Audit Office.
The committee called on the Government to introduce "more stringent procedural safeguards" in relation to these powers in order to avoid breaches of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which relates to a fair hearing and access to a court in the determination of civil rights.
Removes the Prime Minister from involvement in the appointment of judges of the Supreme Court.
*Enshrines in statute the procedure for pre-ratification scrutiny of treaties by parliament, and gives legal effect to a vote against ratification.
*Controversy
The proposed statutory procedure for treaty ratification is based on the Ponsonby Rule [not currently in statute], a practice established in 1924 by Arthur Ponsonby, Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in the first government of Ramsay Macdonald. The practice provides for treaties to be laid before parliament for 21 days before ratification is carried out.
The Joint Committee on Human Rights welcomed the proposal to place parliamentary scrutiny of treaties on a statutory basis, but called for amendments to: a) require the Government to lay an explanatory memorandum before parliament at the same time the treaty is laid and b) require ministers to explain why any request for an extension of parliamentary time for scrutiny has been refused.
The committee also called for the proposal to allow ministerial power to "disapply the new regime in exceptional circumstances" to be removed from the bill, explaining: "Our experience of attempting to scrutinise the Prisoner Transfer Agreement with Libya leads us to be very wary of granting to ministers a very widely worded power to proceed to ratification of a treaty after bypassing Parliament altogether…….. We agree with the Public Administration Committee, that 'it does not seem right that it should be for the Government alone to decide whether to circumvent its obligations to Parliament', and that 'a safeguard that can be ignored at will is no safeguard at all'."
*Repeals legislation that limits protests around parliament.
*Controversy
The human rights organisation Liberty was "pleased" that the bill proposed the repeal of sections 132-138 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act, but was concerned about replacement provisions. Liberty noted that the bill would amend Public Order Act 1986 by inserting a new section relating to public processions or assemblies which would give the Secretary of State power to specify ”requirements that must be met in relation to the maintaining of access to and from the Palace of Westminster”. Liberty felt this power was too broad, with "significant potential for regulating and restricting protest around parliament."
The JCHR agreed, expressing concern about "the vagueness of the language used" and "the possibility of open-ended and broadly drafted discretions being conferred on police officers by these provisions." The committee recommended that the bill be amended "to reduce the scope for any possible uncertainty" about the discretions.
Introduces new time limits for Human Rights actions against devolved administrations.
Introduces measures designed to increase the transparency of financial reporting to Parliament.
*Provides for a referendum to be held, no later than 31 October 2011, on the voting system for parliamentary elections.
*Controversy
Voters in the referendum will be asked if they would prefer the "alternative vote" system to be used for parliamentary elections, rather than the current "first past the post" system. MPs agreed the new clause, moved by Justice Secretary Jack Straw, by 365 votes to 187 following a lengthy debate in the Commons.
An amendment from the Liberal Democrats calling for a referendum on the single transferable vote system - and for the referendum to be brought forward to May 30th 2011 - was defeated by 476 votes to 69. Lib Dem Home Affairs spokesman Chris Huhne said it was "a missed chance for a peoples choice on fully fair votes, as the Alternative Vote is the minimum change that could be made in our system."
Shadow Justice Secretary Dominic Grieve claimed Labour would benefit from AV. "The alternative vote system would have delivered more seats than the first-past-the-post system for Labour in 2005, even though it only gained 36 per cent. of the popular vote," he said. "That seems to me to be a very poor starting-point for change in that direction." He also suggested the Liberal Democrats would "significantly benefit" under the AV system, giving them more seats. "They must think that we were born yesterday if they think that we are going to support such a proposal," he added.
But the Electoral Reform Society welcomed the decisive Commons vote in favour of a referendum on AV, saying it marked "the beginning of the end" of FPTP. "A clear majority of parliamentarians have shown they are willing to break with the past and build a better politics," chief executive Dr Ken Ritchie said.
"We wanted MPs to back the amendment on the Single Transferable Vote. The Alternative Vote will not go nearly as far to deliver a representative parliament, an accountable government and responsive MPs. But we finally have movement towards a better voting system."
Progress of the bill:
The constitutional reform and governance bill was announced by the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, Jack Straw, on 20th July, 2009.
Session: 2008-09
Commons:
First Reading: 20.07.09 Second Reading: 20.10.09 Committee Stage: 03.11.09 04.11.09
Session: 2009-10
Commons:
First Reading: 19.11.09 Second Reading (no debate): 19.11.09 Committee Stage: 19.01.10 26.01.10 01.02.10 09.02.10 Report Stage: 02.03.10 Third Reading: 02.03.10
Lords:
First Reading: 03.03.10 Second Reading: 24.03.10