HL Deb 04 November 1999 vol 606 cc99-100WA
Lord Wedderburn of Charlton

asked Her Majesty's Government:

(a) What is the status of the document Explanatory Notes to the Employment Relations Act 1999 and of its explanations and comments on the Act; (b) whether the Central Arbitration Committee (CAC) or the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) will be expected to comply with, or pay special attention to, its interpretations on points of law; (c) whether Ministers are among those responsible for the interpretations offered in it, and what liability, if any, the Government envisage arising from any erroneous interpretations, in particular any which are found to conflict with decisions of the courts or tribunals or with appropriate advice offered to parties involved in the application of the Act or with government statements made to Parliament; and (d) what consultations, if any, those responsible for the document had, before its publication, with the CAC or with established legal publishers, the social partners or other persons interested in the Act. [HL4309]

Lord Sainsbury of Turville

The explanatory notes for the Employment Relations Act 1999 were issued on the authority of DTI Ministers to provide readers with information on the Government's understanding of the effect of that legislation; its future intentions; and the factual background to the legislation.

Explanatory notes for this or any other Act are not an exhaustive description of an Act nor in any way a substitute for it. Their purpose is to make Acts accessible to readers who are not legally qualified and who have no specialised knowledge of the matters dealt with, allowing them to grasp what an Act does and how it does it.

The notes are not legislation. They do not form part of an Act and—in their original versions accompanying Bills—are not amendable by nor endorsed by Parliament. Nor are they designed to resolve ambiguities in the legislative text nor to interpret points of law. That has always been a matter for the courts and the notes do not change that. The Government have not attempted to prescribe any particular legal status to explanatory notes. That is a matter for the courts. If the notes are successful in the purpose of helping the reader, they are likely to be read by judges and those concerned with applying the law as well as by others. Occasionally it may be that the notes are referred to in litigation, as Hansard is under the rule in Pepper v. Hart.

However, the notes do not relieve anyone of responsibility for complying with existing legislation and case law. The Government would not accept any liability should an instance arise where a conflict existed between the notes and the law and the notes rather than the law had been followed.

The notes for the Employment Relations Act 1999 were drafted by DTI officials in conjunction with departmental legal advisers. Parliamentary Counsel were consulted. The notes were not the subject of consultation with outside bodies, but comments made on the earlier versions of the notes, which accompanied the Bill, were taken into account in preparing the final version.