§ (i) Timing of Debates It is the Government's practice that debates on European documents should be held as far in advance as is practicable of the expected adoption of the proposal concerned. It is desirable that this should be at the point when the voice of the House can be most influential. As a general rule, this will normally be early rather than late in the life of a proposal. The Committee rightly notes that the selection of an optimum time for debates is very much a matter of judgement. The Government fully accept the Committee's view that, when making this judgement, it should be the rule always to err on the side of an early debate, and Departments will be instructed accordingly.
§ (ii) Adoption of Documents before Scrutiny The Government agree that Ministers should not be advised in normal circumstances to agree to the adoption of a proposal before the Committee has considered it. As the Committee recognises, it is unavoidable that some documents will come up for adoption before being scrutinised. When this happens before a formal document which can be deposited for Parliamentary scrutiny is available, it is the rule, in accordance with the then Lord Privy Seal's reply to the Hon. Member for Newham South on 14 May 1980, that the Committee should be kept fully informed wherever possible by the use of unnumbered explanatory memoranda. By convention, Ministers are able to agree to certain confidential, routine or trivial proposals before the scrutiny process has been completed. So far as other proposals are concerned, while in principle the Resolution of the House of 30 October 1980, being addressed solely to documents that the Committee has recommenced for debate, does not bear on proposals yet to be scrutinised, the Government consider that its spirit should apply to all proposals. Departments will therefore be asked to ensure in future that, when consideration is being given to the adoption of unscrutinised proposals, exception (b) of the Resolution of 30 October 1980 is satisfied.
§ (iii) Adoption of Documents after Scrutiny but before Debate The Government accept that the Resolution of the House of 30 October 1980 should guarantee the accountability of Ministers to Parliament in respect of proposals for Community legislation. Departments are instructed to adhere strictly to the terms of the Resolution in operating the scrutiny procedures, and in particular to take all possible steps to ensure that debates are held before decisions have to be taken in Council. To secure greater uniformity in the operation of exception (b) of the Resolution and 800W a more consistent interpretation of what might constitute "special reasons" why agreement should not be withheld even though a debate has not taken place, the attention of Departments will also be drawn to the criteria which were put to the Committee in evidence on this point—
- (a) the fact that the Committee may sometimes indicate when it first considers a document that its recommendation for debate need not delay adoption. It may also agree at a later stage to allow adoption of a document before the scrutiny process has been completed;
- (b) the need to avoid a legal vacuum;
- (c) the desirability of permitting a particular measure of benefit to the United Kingdom to come into operation as soon as possible;
- (d) the difficulty, particularly if the negotiations in the Community have been difficult or protracted, of putting a late reserve on a measure which will either have little effect on the United Kingdom or which is likely to be of benefit to the United Kingdom.
§ Departments will be instructed that agreement to proposals awaiting debate or those yet to be scrutinised should only be contemplated where one of these criteria is satisfied or a comparably important consideration is in issue. The Government accept that, where exception (b) of the Resolution of 30 October 1980 is operated in this way, the Minister responsible should explain to the House the reasons why a debate could not have been held, as well as the advantages of the proposal to the United Kingdom. Departments will be instructed in this sense. They will also be asked to regard oral statements as the rule for important proposals, unless Parliamentary time cannot be made available in the days immediately following adoption, and to ensure that statements, whether written or oral, include a reference to the scrutiny position, an explanation of why the Minister has decided not to withhold agreement and an indication of the likely timing of the debate. When the debate comes to be held, the Minister introducing it will be recommended to refer to the circumstances which necessitated prior adoption and to his earlier statement.
§ (iv) Method of Debate The Government agree that Ministers should provide a reasonably full explanation of a document being debated in Standing Committee, and that a formal moving of the motion without debate is insufficient; Departments will be advised accordingly. The Government also agree that a more general use of Standing Order No. 80 and a wider awareness of Standing Committee debates would be welcome; this suggestion will be followed up with the appropriate authorities. The Government note that the Committee would welcome a greater use of last-minute debates for fast-moving documents, and Departments will be asked to make every effort, within the pressures on Parliamentary time, to explore the possibilities for debate before such proposals come before the Council of Ministers for adoption.
§ Future Prospects The Government accept that special care is needed to ensure the continued involvement of the House in the Community decision-making process. As the Committee notes, the changes which the Government are putting into effect in accordance with the Committee's recommendations will help. The further possibility noted by the Committee of a Select Committee on European Affairs would be a matter for the House, the existing Select Committee structure being in accordance with the recommendations made by the Procedure Committee in 1977–78.