22
For more information on DeHavilland and how we can help with political monitoring, custom research and consultancy, contact: +44 (0)20 3033 3870 [email protected] www.dehavilland.co.uk

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    3

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

For more information on DeHavilland and

how we can help with political monitoring,

custom research and consultancy, contact:

+44 (0)20 3033 3870

[email protected]

www.dehavilland.co.uk

Page 3: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

3

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 www.dehavilland.co.uk

The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be unveiled in

the Queen’s Speech on 18 May.

After making legislation for the EU referendum the centrepiece of last year’s agenda, this year’s

announcement takes place in the run-up to the poll on 23 June.

Indeed, the Queen’s Speech itself was almost sidelined by referendum fever, as rumour and counter-

announcement accompanied a public timetabling wobble and the Government fought to maintain its

grip on the agenda.

Earlier this year, the Times confided: “Ministers have been told the launch of the coming year’s

legislation, scheduled for May, will not take place until after the referendum on June 23”. It

suggested this proposal was due to the need to “clear the decks” for the EU vote.

However, the following week the same paper produced fresh reports that the Prime Minister had

relented on the planned delay and would be bringing forward the speech in late May, after the

devolved elections. This change of mind was reportedly motivated by a sense that Mr Cameron was

losing control of the EU Referendum campaign.

Now that the speech is confirmed for May, Ministers have been ordered to “clear the decks” of any

controversial policies in the crucial final weeks, so this Queen’s Speech represents an opportunity for

the second-term premier to relaunch his domestic agenda in what the Guardian has predicted will be

a “packed” speech.

As he looks towards leaving Downing Street at some point in this Parliament, the Prime Minister’s

thoughts have turned to his legacy. He has used a series of speeches in recent months to single out

issues he wishes to focus on his remaining time at Number 10. These have included raising

educational attainment, prison reform and boosting homeownership.

If recent legislative trends are anything to go by, politics watchers may anticipate one or more

relatively rhetorical bills, designed more as a means of meeting manifesto promises or serving

campaign themes than as instruments of technical virtuosity.

Education is likely to be central to this effort, forming a theme within several of the expected Bills.

Whether in the form of controversial restructuring of the schools system, further liberalisation of

higher education, or attempts to furnish rehabilitation for criminals through prison skills

development, we can expect the Government to put learning front and centre to its 2016-17 agenda.

Page 4: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

4

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 www.dehavilland.co.uk

Indeed, the Financial Times has reported that the 2016 Queen’s Speech will carry a theme of “life

chances and opportunities” designed to improve social mobility as the Prime Minister looks to

cement his legacy during his second term in office.

Thematically, overall, the Government can at least in theory afford to pursue its interests relatively

unmolested as it floats through the first years of fixed-term majority rule. However, Mr Cameron is

facing an increasingly difficult Parliamentary landscape.

The first Conservative Government without a majority in the House of Lords has seen experienced

defeats at the hands of peers on crucial issues such as tax credits, and the difficult Upper Chamber

environment has forced concessions on legislation including trade union reform. The pugnacious

reforms proposed in the Strathclyde Review, designed to clip the wings of the Lords in examining

Secondary Legislation, will likely form part of this Queen’s Speech.

A slender Commons majority of 16 will also likely cause headaches for ministers as unsettled

backbenches make mischief with the Government’s plans. Anger over mandatory academisation

plans provides just one recent example of how backbenchers, emboldened by a divided party, are

increasingly voicing their discontent.

Indeed, the Guardian reported on 16 May that Conservative peer Lord Lansley and a

major think tank had both warned the Government against attempting too much

controversial legislation.

On top of all this, Mr Cameron faces questions over his own position if he loses the EU Referendum,

and at the very least, negotiating a Brexit could prospectively blow domestic reforms seriously off

course. It could even demand the introduction of a raft of new prospective laws. To that end, this

Queen’s Speech could be seen as “wait and see” list.

Indeed, to glean the Government’s inclinations in detail, it is sometimes more fruitful to consider

current developments in Secondary Legislation. As legal experts have observed, recent years have

witnessed increased use of statutory instruments to make substantive and controversial changes

with greater ease than through the cumbersome process accompanying full laws.

If the controversy over tax credits and the plans to change to the BBC’s Licence Fee to cover on-

demand viewing are anything to go by, some of the major moments of political significance could

emerge during proceedings on Secondary Legislation in 2016-17. This could certainly be the case

should the Government decide to take up causes like its promise to hold a Parliamentary vote on

aspects of the ban on fox hunting, a highly emotive and evocative political question.

On the flip side, new laws themselves have seemed in recent years to take on an increasingly

symbolic dimension. In addition to legal wheezes like legislating for a surplus, the contemporary

politicians have shown a fondness for peppering the Queen’s Speech with proposed legislation like

2015’s Social Action, Responsibility and Heroism Bill, an experiment in media-friendly statute

notable both for its brevity and the venom with which it was received by assorted legal experts in the

Upper Chamber.

Page 5: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

5

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 www.dehavilland.co.uk

Regardless of the length and detail of what is proposed on 18 May, the Government will be eager to

make a clear impression. Against the backdrop of personal priministerial triumph or disaster, setting

a clear agenda has seldom seemed so crucial for the opening of a Parliamentary year.

In this briefing, DeHavilland takes a close-up look at what to expect on 18 May, including key

speculation, rumours and reports.

Updates will be marked like this throughout.

Page 6: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

6

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 www.dehavilland.co.uk

In a speech in February, David Cameron announced the creation of ‘reform prisons’ to be run by

“some of the most innovative governors” from across the penal system.

The Prime Minister also announced the Government’s intention to bring in a Prisons Bill to expand

the principles across the prison system. Additionally, he noted, there would be a move towards full

co-commissioning powers for prison governors and NHS England in giving more control over

mental health expenditure.

The legislation, he said would underpin these principles and enable successes to be rolled out across

the country from 2017, and develop full co-commissioning powers for governors and NHS England.

Further details of the plans emerged in March when Justice Secretary Michael Gove appeared before

the Justice Committee. He explained that he wanted to create “reform prisons” modelled on

academy schools, which would be judged according to league tables. Among the mooted indicators

for performance Mr Gove listed the amount of time prisoners spent outside their cells, as well as the

amounts of contraband discovered. Back in December, the Times suggested that the reforms would

be focused on maximising prisoners’ contact with their families as part of the overall rehabilitation

strategy.

In a further echo of the Government’s chosen model for the schools system, failing prisons could be

taken over by their successful counterparts.

These details shed some light on the educational themes reportedly dominating among the

Government’s 2016 legislative proposals. Meanwhile, another of the country’s key policy priorities,

housing, will be addressed through efforts to close and sell off city centre prison facilities to be

converted into homes.

Some commentators have expressed a critical attitude towards the Government’s plans. Writing in

the Guardian in early April, columnist Erwin James argued that the changes sought in the Prison

Reform Bill would demand major increases in staffing and funding that could prove difficult to

deliver.

Referencing the Bill as part of a rundown of expected legislation published on 16 May, the

Times described it as aiming to “allow more services to be privatised”.

On a related note, speculation has emerged about the inclusion of a possible “Victims’ Law” in the

Government’s legislative agenda. Given clear statements of intention from ministers regarding

Page 7: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

7

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 www.dehavilland.co.uk

future prisons legislation, it seems possible that elements of this agenda could simultaneously be

incorporated.

In response to a Question in the House of Commons on education in prisons, Policing, Crime and

Criminal Justice and Victims Minister Mike Penning discussed the introduction of a victims’ law that

would incorporate elements of restorative justice.

This measure was mentioned in the Conservative General Election Manifesto, but there has been

little other mention of such measures since then. In the manifesto, the Party promised to “enshrine

key rights for victims, including the right to make a personal statement and have it read in court

before sentencing – and before the Parole Board decides on a prisoner's release”.

It also stated that it would give all vulnerable victims and witnesses the opportunity to give evidence

outside court and to roll out pre-trial cross examination for child victims nationally.

There is presently a Private Member’s Bill before the House which was brought by Shadow Home

Office Minister Sir Keir Starmer. The Bill seeks to “make further provision” regarding the duties of

the Victims’ Commissioner and about the Victims’ Code, as well as making several other provisions

for victims. Speaking to the Guardian, Sir Keir expressed his hopes that the Government would adopt

his proposed legislation.

In January 2016, with relatively little fanfare, the Department of Energy and Climate Change

published a new piece of draft legislation containing measures designed to increase energy market

competition and reduce consumer costs. Legislation brought forward by the Government seems set

to make significant reference to smart meters as the industry presses forward towards the national

rollout of this new technology.

While the Government is no longer facing the same political pressures over the cost of power due to

a combination of changing rhetorical priorities and falling global wholesale prices, it remains keen to

head off criticism over the state of the energy market by implementing its preferred solutions.

Possessing a firm belief in the need to stimulate switching behaviour in order to increase competition

for domestic energy consumers in particular, technological aids like smart meters will be

increasingly important for pragmatic reasons, boasting the ability to rationalise billing and empower

ordinary users.

Along similar lines, the draft legislation is also designed to give Ofgem powers to support

arrangements for next-day switching. Commentary provided with the proposed Bill included

reference to the findings of the major Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) review into the

state of the energy market.

Following the publication of the draft legislation, the Energy and Climate Change Committee

conducted pre-legislative scrutiny including hearing evidence from witnesses representing DECC

and Ofgem. At time of writing, the Committee’s inquiry had yet to report, but it seems likely that the

Government could republish the proposed Bill with amendments as deemed necessary during the

2016-17 Parliamentary year.

Page 8: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

8

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 www.dehavilland.co.uk

Ministers have already explicitly confirmed their intention to introduce a Digital Economy Bill

featuring new reforms for the telecommunications industry. The legislation will attempt to address

unfinished business from the Infrastructure Act 2015 by reforming the Electronic Communications

Code.

These changes were originally attempted by the Coalition during the Commons Committee Stage of

this piece of multi-subject legislation. Introducing them, then-Transport Minister John Hayes said

that the existing law in this area was “clearly no longer fit for purpose” as it was not clear enough.

The changes he sought to introduce at that juncture reflected recommendations from the Law

Commission on the assignment of code rights and the upgrading and sharing of apparatus, and

would contain a two-stage test for agreements designed to ensure site owners could be compensated

and public benefits would outweigh harm done.

Not long after, at Report Stage, Mr Hayes abruptly withdrew the provisions. Labour seized on this,

having opposed the format of the changes on the basis that they were unclear and had not received

sufficient scrutiny. Then-Shadow Culture, Media and Sport Minister Chris Bryant accused the

Government of having unsuccessfully tried to secure a “magic deal” with mobile operators on the

ECC, while his colleagues suggested that the Government’s proposals could have lost £1bn for the

taxpayer.

Speaking during a debate on mobile infrastructure in early February, Culture and Digital Economy

Minister Ed Vaizey told the House: “We are bringing in changes to allow mobile operators to erect

taller masts, which will enable the signal to go further and have a significant impact in rural areas.

We are going to change the Electronic Communications Code, which governs access to masts and

has a significant effect on the cost of maintaining infrastructure. We want to bring that forward

through a Digital Economy Bill”.

Two months later, on 13 April, he appeared before the Culture, Media and Sport Committee to as

part of its inquiry into world-class connectivity throughout the UK. Mr Vaizey explained that the

Government would be publishing the Digital Economy Bill in June or July 2016.

The minister said that the reformed ECC would be designed to support the erection of mobile phone

masts, and told the Committee in response to questioning that the changes had been delayed as a

result of objections to their original form voiced by Vodafone.

“We consulted extensively on it and we were ready to go last year, but Vodafone told us that the

proposals were not right and could we go round again”, he said.

Page 9: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

9

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 www.dehavilland.co.uk

Questioned by MPs about the Government’s intentions vis-a-vis its promise for a Universal Service

Obligation (USO) on broadband provision, Mr Vaizey revealed that the Bill would also contain

provisions to support this policy, which he described as “the final chapter” in the initial superfast

broadband rollout.

Supplying more detail, he said that the Government had not yet decided on how the USO should be

funded, but might opt for a mixed model involving some funding from industry. He noted that there

might be a potential cap on the amount of public or industry funding required, as in some cases

individual connections could carry a very high cost. Furthermore, he noted that the speeds

guaranteed under the USO would represent a minimum level.

Recapping previous announcements, the Financial Times noted that the USO would be for

a minimum broadband speed of at least 10 Mbps. Elaborating on the ECC debate, it also

explained that the Bill was expected to try and help mobile operators erect masts in rural

areas by forcing landowners to rent out sites based on the value of the land and forbidding

the extraction of “ransom” payments.

The Bill is also likely to reflect some of the findings arising from a major consultation announced by

Mr Vaizey last year. Discussing his ambitions for developing a new UK Digital Strategy, the minister

outlined issues including digitisation by businesses; digital delivery of Government services;

efficiencies in education and health; and the availability and security of internet connections.

The Financial Times reported that the Bill would include an increase in powers for

telecoms regulator Ofcom, with suggestions that the threshold for appealing the regulator’s

decisions could be raised to the level of Judicial Review. At present, decisions can be taken to

the Competition Appeal Tribunal.

Further, the body is expected to receive new powers to make telecoms providers help

customers switch to rivals and provide automatic compensation for faults in broadband

services.

It was also reported by The Register that the Government’s response to the Better Use of Data

consultation would feed into the Bill, and would create a governance framework for the

sharing of personal information between Government departments and third parties, as well

as setting out security principles for using personal information.

One of the most glaring leftovers from the 2015 Queen’s Speech announcements is the planned

“Buses Bill”, which, after being apparently delayed over the Parliamentary year, now looks set to

appear on the 2016 agenda.

Transport Minister Andrew Jones revealed key details of the legislation in a speech to the UK Bus

Summit on 11 February 2016.

He said that the Bill planned would be an enabling one, containing new requirements for operators

to provide data about routes, fares and times on an open and accessible basis. It would also allow

Page 10: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

10

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 www.dehavilland.co.uk

local authorities and bus operators to enter into new partnerships, free from requirements around

new infrastructure, with both sides able to set their own standards.

Finally, he added, in keeping with the Government’s wider agenda of moving powers downwards

to a local level, combined local authorities would be able to franchise bus services under devolution

deals.

Responding to a Parliamentary Question from Labour MP Bridget Phillipson in April, Mr Jones

confirmed that the Government was working towards bringing the Bill in the coming Parliamentary

session.

Transport Minister Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon announced that the legislation would be

introduced in the forthcoming parliamentary session, during a Lords debate on 11 May.

He said: “I am therefore pleased to announce that we are currently preparing to introduce

our bus services Bill during the next parliamentary Session

The prime focus of the Bill is delivering powers to local authorities for them to make

decisions over their local bus services in line with local priorities [...]

It will introduce new franchising powers and contain stronger arrangements to allow local

government to work in partnership with bus operators and local stakeholders”.

A document setting out the objectives of Department for Transport Permanent Secretary Philip

Rutnam’s Individual Performance Objectives for 2015-16 lists preparing and bringing in the

“Modern Transport Bill” as part of a wider suite of work aimed at ensuring the system is prepared

for future challenges.

In an appearance before the Lords EU Internal Market sub-Committee on 21 April, Transport

Minister Robert Goodwill said ministers were working with the Civil Aviation Authority to explore

if the legislation could be used to introduce new regulations for remotely piloted aircraft systems

(drones). This followed reports of a drone striking a plane near Heathrow Airport. However, at

Transport Questions on 28 April, Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin downplayed the idea that

the incident had actually involved a drone.

He said the Government was keen to discuss measures for banning high-powered laser pens, which

could be used against aircraft pilots during take-off or landing.

Later in the same session, Mr Goodwill stressed that the inclusion of any Transport Bill in the

Queen’s Speech was a matter of timing.

In another area of Department for Transport competence, the outcome of the Competition and

Markets Authority (CMA) review into the scope for increasing competition in the rail passenger

sector was published in March. It recommended numerous reforms that could benefit open access

operators and passengers, including fairer charges and robust protections for taxpayer and investors.

Page 11: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

11

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 www.dehavilland.co.uk

In a Written Statement on 17 March, Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin said the Government

was working with the Office of Rail and Road to implement the CMA’s recommendations, including

legislation if necessary.

However, the Transport Secretary has been urged by party colleagues to hold back from making

new laws for the moment. Speaking at an event in Westminster on 27 April, his former PPS

Conservative MP Iain Stewart said it would be “premature” to include any Railways Bill in the

Queen’s Speech until the CMA recommendations had been carefully considered.

Rail Minister Claire Perry restated the Government’s commitment to lowering the threshold for the

delay repay scheme to 15 minutes during Transport Questions on 28 April.

On 15 May, the Department for Transport confirmed that measures concerning driverless

cars, drones and a proposed commercial spaceport in the UK would be introduced as part of

the Modern Transport Bill.

It explained that legislation would be brought in to allow driverless cars to be insured under

ordinary policies, while ministers said the spaceport would constructed by the end of the

Parliament. The Government is reportedly also keen to explore ways to increase growth and

innovation in the drone industry for private and commercial use.

There have also been reports in the Yorkshire Post that tougher jail terms could be introduced

for drivers who have killed people, with the longest sentence currently available being 14

years.

After the landmark Scotland Bill occupied much Parliamentary time and attention during the 2015-

16 Parliamentary year, it is now the turn of Wales to receive further devolutionary attention as the

Government tends to both demands for greater powers and an opportunity to further its economic

agenda and growing electoral prospects.

Having been released in draft form in October 2015, the Government’s next Wales Bill was

scrutinised by the Welsh Affairs Committee but was heavily criticised in a report by members, who

called for a pause in the process.

The MPs argued that the proposed list of powers needed to be reconsidered, with greater

explanation in some areas as to why powers would be handed to the National Assembly for Wales.

Page 12: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

12

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 www.dehavilland.co.uk

As a result, then-Wales Secretary Stephen Crabb said that he would delay the Bill until the Summer

in order for these matters to be reconsidered. Among the changes he mooted was the scrapping of a

necessity test Welsh ministers would have to consider before passing new laws.

He also stated that he would limit the need for them to consult with the UK Government before

passing certain laws.

Welsh First Minister Carwyn Jones has since unveiled his alternative draft Wales Bill, proposing a

reduction in the list of reserved powers and a separate legal system for Wales.

With Jeremy Hunt revealing to the BBC’s Today programme that his role as Health Secretary was

likely to be his “last big job in politics” on 26 April, Mr Hunt and his colleagues could use the

Queen’s Speech to divert attention from the continuing row over the imposition of the junior

doctors’ contract through new measures that will define his legacy.

Before the end of the last Parliament, Mr Hunt signalled his desire to legislate to protect NHS

whistleblowers before the 2015 General Election. This followed the publication of the Freedom to

Speak Up report, led by Sir Robert Francis.

Recommendations from the review led to the establishment of a National Guardian. The Care

Quality Commission appointed Dame Eileen Sills in January 2016, but she later resigned in March

2016.

Rumours have once again surfaced that Mr Hunt hopes to create a concrete set of whistleblower

protections in primary legislation, as the Daily Mail reported in February that legislation was

forthcoming.

The Times further suggested that doctors and nurses who admit to mistakes would be granted

immunity, “under a new regime that seeks to end a blame culture in the NHS”. The paper

speculated that a new investigation branch, “modelled on airline accident inquiries” could be given

legal powers to keep revelations secret.

“To deliver a safer NHS for patients seven days a week, we need to unshackle ourselves from a

quick-fix blame culture and acknowledge that sometimes bad mistakes can be made by good

people.” Mr Hunt told the paper.

Elsewhere, the Times has also hinted that the Government is considering further devolution of

healthcare functions, with proposals for local areas to be granted control over their total budget for

family doctors, hospitals, social care and mental health.

On 3 May, two stories on the upcoming contents of the Queen’s Speech both raised the potential for

an explicitly-designated Care Bill to be included in the legislative programme. As part of pieces

about the proposed Extremism Bill, the Times and Daily Mail both included an identical paragraph in

Page 13: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

13

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 www.dehavilland.co.uk

their stories, which reported that the Government’s legislative programme “will include reforms to

Britain’s care home and prison systems”.

This was subsequently corroborated by the Guardian, which told readers on 14 May that

the Government was planning to introduce measures to “[include] greater support for care

leavers into adulthood, and adoption, including more emphasis on placing children in

permanent homes rather than with distant family”.

Writing on 16 May, the Times made reference to an “Adoption and Care Bill”, which it said

would “speed up the adoption process and give new powers for government to intervene

when social services are failing”.

Speaking during a meeting of the Education Committee on the Government’s social work

reforms that took place on 4 May, Children and Families Minister Edward Timpson had

informed the Committee that legislation would be required to introduce the Government’s

planned social work body.

With the Queen’s Speech fast approaching, the contents of the Government’s legislative agenda

drew the attentions of Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn in his weekly audience with David Cameron at

Prime Minister’s Questions on 27 April 2016.

Mr Corbyn asked the Prime Minister if the Government would bring forward legislation to require

all schools to become academies as part of the Queen’s Speech. Responding, Mr Cameron declared:

“We’re going to have academies for all, and it’ll be in the Queen’s Speech”.

He defended this high-profile proposal by declaring that he believed even schools rated Good and

Outstanding could find room for improvement. He identified his plans with a preoccupation with

aspiration and opportunity, accusing his Labour opponent of wanting to maintain bad quality

institutions.

The academisation plan was reported in the Guardian back in March, with the paper claiming that

the Government was about to publish draft legislation. This did not appear, but details of the

proposals formed a high-profile part of the Chancellor’s Budget speech.

Page 14: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

14

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 www.dehavilland.co.uk

Amidst a set of financial policies that were poorly received, some critics of the Government

interpreted the deployment of the academisation announcement in this context as evidence of an

attempt to distract away from the genuine substance of Treasury announcements.

Furthermore, the plan has already, as Mr Corbyn sought to convey to the Prime Minister, been

subject to furious criticism from various corners, including, notably Conservative MPs and local

authority leaders.

In early April, the Observer reported on the threat of a “Tory backbench rebellion” over forced

academisation, and opponents have already begun to associate these proposals with unpopular NHS

reforms in damning anti-Government rhetoric.

Indeed, this threat appeared to have produced the desired effect on 6 May when it

emerged that the Government had decided to relent on the full academisation plan.

In what media sources described as a “climbdown”, Education Secretary Nicky Morgan

confirmed that schools rated “Good” or “Outstanding” by Ofsted would be permitted to

remain under local authority control.

The TES informed readers that the planned announcements would now “be a watered-down

version of ministers’ original vision of an all-academies system”.

However, there will still be measures designed to require academy conversion for schools “in

underperforming or unviable local authorities” where “the local authority can no longer

viably support its remaining schools because a critical mass of schools in that area has

converted”, or “where the local authority consistently fails to meet a minimum performance

threshold across its schools, demonstrating an inability to bring about meaningful school

improvement”.

The TES added that ministers were reportedly “still hopeful that an all-academies system will

be achieved by 2022”.

The plan to make all schools into academies may be seen as the culmination of a series of measures

designed to increase the number of schools administered in this fashion.

After initially ratcheting up the pace of academisation during the Coalition years, since coming into

sole possession of political power, the Conservatives have already added new measures to define

and respond to a category of schools labelled “coasting”, expanding the original criteria of failure as

motivator for academisation towards a more general aspirational proposition.

On 10 March, the Financial Times highlighted the Government’s intention of presenting a new Bill

designed to liberalise higher education.

Referring to the proposals as Thatcherite in outlook, the paper explained that they reflected a desire

to remove barriers to the creation of new private universities, so as to “broaden access and create

more competition”, paving the way for “a new generation of higher education providers”.

Page 15: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

15

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 www.dehavilland.co.uk

The key model for this proposed higher education revolution will inevitably be the University of

Buckingham, a landmark institution created under Baroness Thatcher in 1983. The Financial Times

chose to view this proposal as a bid to reunify a fractious Conservative Party amid major divisions

over the EU Referendum.

By way of background, it was reported early last Autumn that Universities and Science Minister Jo

Johnson is eager to reform the “anti-competitive” sector in order to provide better access for private

institutions.

Speaking to the Financial Times following his address to the Universities UK annual conference, he

declared: “We need to bust this system right open”. He attacked the requirement for new institutions

to have their degrees validated by existing universities, and argued that the accreditation process

was much too slow.

However, any proposals made could face stiff opposition from both academics and the Public

Accounts Committee, which has already criticised the Government’s direction of public funds

towards alternative higher education providers, and argued that the sector is insufficiently

regulated.

Further details of the proposals emerged in the days immediately preceding the Queen’s

Speech, with the Times reporting on 16 May that the Bill would contain measures to enable

students to switch between universities more easily, and to penalise universities for poor

teaching.

It explained that universities would be banded together according to teaching ability, with

those managing to score highly in teaching assessments able to increase their tuition fees in

line with inflation.

The Government is reportedly seeking to prioritise teaching over research, amid concerns

over low numbers of dedicated teaching hours, and also improve participation, particularly

by male students.

In keeping with earlier reports, the Times highlighted how the Government’s White Paper on

the issue would “make it easier for businesses and organisations to award degrees and even

set up universities”.

The Telegraph reported on 15 May that the Queen’s Speech would include a new Skills Bill.

The legislation would apparently force children aged 16 to choose between academic study

and vocational training after leaving school. The intention was to end the mixed options that

were currently available to sixth-formers.

Page 16: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

16

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 www.dehavilland.co.uk

On 21 April, the BBC and a number of other media outlets reported that Home Secretary Theresa

May was planning a new law designed to tackle corruption among politicians and officials. The

planned offence of “illicit enrichment” would cover cases in which officials’ assets increase

substantially without a satisfactory explanation.

The issue of money laundering has come under increased scrutiny in recent months following the

Panama Papers revelations, which created a damaging media storm. With the Government keen to

be seen offering a strong reaction, it could view the Queen’s Speech as the ideal moment to set out

reforms to tighten the legal net.

On 21 April, the Government announced a consultation to underpin what it labelled the “biggest

reforms to [the] money laundering regime in over a decade”. Under the banner of an action plan on

anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist finance, it was described as a bid to implement some of the

priorities arising from the 2015 National Security Strategy and Strategic Defence and Security

Review.

The Government has also set out proposals for “Unexplained Wealth Orders”, new court-imposed

measures that would allow authorities to seize property and cash from suspected money launderers.

The genesis of future provisions on tax evasion and the role of companies in facilitating it can be

traced in a pre-Budget announcement made during the dying days of the Coalition by then-Chief

Treasury Secretary Danny Alexander. Speaking in February 2015, he said that the Government

wanted to extend the Bribery Act by creating a new offence to cover firms failing to act to prevent

economic crime.

Although subsequent reports appeared to pour cold water on aspects of the proposals, they were

later put out to consultation, and in April 2016 the Government published draft legislation featuring

proposed new offences. Explaining the Government’s approach during an Opposition Day debate,

ministers told the House that the Bill would “make it a crime where corporations fail to prevent their

representatives from criminally facilitating tax evasion”.

Page 17: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

17

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 www.dehavilland.co.uk

The Government has declared the unprecedented character of its legislative approach to holding

corporations to account for criminal wrongdoing, noting that provisions would be applied to both

British and overseas operators, and would “ set a new standard for corporate responsibility and

accountability”.

Among the more mysterious proposals mooted for inclusion in this year’s Queen’s Speech is a

reported Bill on the theme of preventing discrimination and improving community relations. The

Times has claimed: “There will be further measures to realise Mr Cameron’s dream of making Britain

the “proudest multiracial democracy on earth” and ending discrimination”.

Given the Prime Minister’s tendency to employ this particular phrase in the context of discussing

controversial questions of integration such as gender relations within ethnic minority communities,

it seems plausible that any such Bill to emerge in the speech this May will also contain a strong

gender equality theme.

One possible related equalities issue that could appear in the Bill is a rumoured proposal to legislate

so that mothers’ names will be recorded on their children’s marriage certificates. Last year, the

Government finally bowed to pressure following a large-scale petition, and promised to begin

including mothers’ names, a symbolic decision designed to further women’s social standing.

In keeping with long-term backbench preoccupations and a high-profile manifesto promise,

Conservative Justice Ministers have consistently pledged to introduce of a British Bill of Rights, and

continued these promises after triumphing in the 2015 General Election, amid significant criticism

from human rights campaigners.

However, the trail has since gone rather cold, and the much-vaunted Bill of Rights has yet to be

proposed in any concrete form, despite the Independent suggesting last October that the Government

was planning to “fast-track” the proposal into law by this Summer.

Much of the discussion around the plan in the early months of the Parliament was focused on the

technicalities of whether the UK would need to opt out of different aspects of the European human

rights framework, and the prospective legality and impact of the changes on the UK’s devolved

nations and regions, including Scotland, which has a distinct legal system, and Northern Ireland,

where local history makes human rights a particularly pertinent concern.

In April 2016 Home Secretary Theresa May made the headlines by calling for Britain to abandon the

European Convention on Human Rights and adopt this proposed new charter in its place.

However, during a Questions session with Justice Ministers on 26 April, both Justice Secretary

Michael Gove and Human Rights Minister Dominic Raab rejected Ms May’s suggestion, and stated

that it was one of a number of proposals under consideration.

Page 18: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

18

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 www.dehavilland.co.uk

The Telegraph reported on 15 May that a consultation on reforming human rights laws

would be included in the Queen’s Speech to attempt to make the UK Supreme Court the final

court in such matters. It insisted that Britain would remain a member of the ECHR, but

would seek to curb the influence of the Strasbourg court over UK law.

Announced in the 2015 Queen’s Speech, proposals for a new Extremism Bill were published by the

Cabinet Office but were not introduced. Currently under legislative scrutiny, the proposed Bill

includes measures on banning orders, extremism disruption orders, closures orders, broadcasting

rules on extremism, and employment checks.

On Tuesday 3 May, two major papers carried further news about the proposed Extremism Bill. The

Times declared that David Cameron would use the Bill to “put curbing Islamist extremism at the

heart of the Queen’s Speech” in what it called a bid to “fend off claims that he is becoming a lame

duck Prime Minister”.

Also given prominent coverage in the Daily Mail, the newspapers informed readers that the Bill

would include ‘measures to ban organisations, gag individuals and close down premises used to

“promote hatred’”, the paper promised, noting that the Home Secretary would shortly be launching

a review into the operation of Sharia courts in the UK.

It would extend vetting rules in order to prevent “known extremists” from working with children

and the vulnerable or carrying out work in “sensitive areas”. The Government has also reportedly

proposed to extend the powers of telecoms regulator Ofcom so it can suspend broadcasts deemed to

include “unacceptable extremist material”, though sources acknowledged that determining the

thresholds for such new measures could prove problematic.

The Telegraph reported on 14 May that the Bill had been delayed because the Home Office

has struggled to produce a legally watertight definition of ‘extremism’. The current definition

in the counter-extremism strategy is reported to be too loose to stand up to a legal challenge

in court.

The paper also noted how the Government was aiming to ensure extremists could be treated

in the same way as paedophiles, by excluding them from working with children and

vulnerable adults.

Ministers previously announced their intention to introduce a Votes for Life Bill to scrap the so-

called 15-year-rule preventing around a million out of five million total Britons living overseas from

voting in UK Parliamentary elections if they have lived out of the country for a decade and a half or

more.

The proposed legislation was announced in the last Queen’s Speech, but has yet to be published.

Given the relevance and contentiousness of the issue, there had previously been hope among expats

Page 19: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

19

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 www.dehavilland.co.uk

that the legislation would have been enacted ahead of the EU Referendum vote on 23 June, so as to

allow them to participate.

Several prospective changes to the planning system have been mooted for inclusion in

this year’s Queen’s Speech.

Chancellor George Osborne announced in the 2016 Budget that the Government would

consult on a second wave of compulsory purchase reforms. The proposals included new

requirements to bring compulsory purchase orders into operation and provide clearer terms

in primary legislation.

The Budget also contained plans for new legislation to “speed up and simplify the process for

delivering new settlements”. On 12 May 2016, the FT reported that councils were set to

receive greater powers to seize land and approve large scale housebuilding. Mr Osborne

hopes to deliver up to 100,000 homes in a new wave of garden towns and cities. It was also

reported that Transport for London would be given powers to finance infrastructure projects

to increase the value of land it owns.

Ministers also intend to streamline the use of planning conditions, specifically to ensure that

pre-commencement can only be used with the agreement of a developer. Legislation is

expected to underpin the role of the National Infrastructure Commission in law, including

laying its assessments before Parliament and placing a duty on the Treasury to respond.

During Work and Pensions Committee held on 9 March 2016, Pensions Minister Baroness Altmann

said she was pushing for primary legislation in order to secure further reforms in this area of strong

Government interest.

She expressed concern about whether enough would people “stay in, and want to stay engaged” as

pension contributions rose, and said she hoped pension companies would do more to help

customers, and offer them good value.

The scheme into which people were enrolled had to be safe and secure, she added, noting problems

around master trusts, multi-employer schemes featuring subdivisions according to an employee’s

affiliation.

“Ideally it would be a legislative route” to put in place protections “not just for assets” but to ensure

that the costs of winding up a trust did not fall on the member's assets, Baroness Altmann urged.

Pressed, she confessed that the Government did not currently have any legislation ready to go, but

said she was hoping a Bill would emerge.

Page 20: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

20

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 www.dehavilland.co.uk

One of the most controversial potential acts the Government could embark on in the coming

Parliamentary year would be a bid to implement the Strathclyde Review, a report on legislative

procedure that followed a series of high-profile humiliations handed down to the Government from

the House of Lords, which in the 2015-16 session has used the lack of a Conservative majority among

peers to block and blunt a series of policy measures including landmark Statutory Instruments.

Lord Strathclyde’s deliberations were commissioned by the Government to the consternation of

critics who mocked the idea that a hereditary peer should be called upon to remedy the acts of Lords

denounced for their unelected status. It produced three principal options for clipping the wings of

the Lords vis-a-vis vetoing secondary legislation.

His possible options were as follows: 1) Remove the Lords altogether from the procedure for

approving SIs, 2) Restrict peers’ powers on SIs via a non-statutory “binding resolution”, or 3) Reform

peers’ powers so they could merely delay SIs by asking the House of Commons to “think again”. In

this scenario, the Commons could override the Lords, as is the case for statutes and international

treaty approvals.

In discussing the second of his proposals, Lord Strathclyde expressed specific doubts about whether

one could achieve the desired result simply by ushering in a new convention, even supposing it

achieved the necessary cross-party support and resolutions in both Houses. He thus argued that

Option 3 was the right one to choose.

Lord Strathclyde explained that his third suggested option “would need primary legislation to

implement it”, though he noted that “the legislation need not be lengthy”.

Upon the publication of the review last December, the Telegraph suggested that the Government

could introduce such a new law as early as Spring 2016, to fit a timetable of implementation by the

end of the calendar year.

Given the controversy that would inevitably accompany such a constitutionally significant change,

however, it seems hardly surprising that a new Bill has not been rushed into existence. Quite aside

from the technical expertise required to draft such delicate changes to a complicated body of law,

convention and precedent, any attempt to change the rules in this way is likely to attract major

opprobrium from experts, Opposition politicians of all stripes and sections of the general population.

Indeed, the Lords Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee has already published a highly critical

report on the proposals, which rejected them amid concerns about the increasing tendency of the

Page 21: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

21

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 www.dehavilland.co.uk

Government to incorporate far-reaching powers, including so-called “Henry VIII clauses”, in

primary legislation. This controversial trend in legislation allows major changes to take place via the

means of SIs, reducing their perceived legal seriousness, and thus curtailing the process of scrutiny.

Notwithstanding the distractions of the EU Referendum and other forms of rebellion currently

troubling the Government, it seems likely that the Government will revisit this issue in one form or

another this year, given the continued ability of the Lords to inflict painful defeats on the

Government over hot topic issues.

In February, the Government introduced the Policing and Crime Bill. During a debate in the House

of Commons just before its publication, Policing, Fire, Criminal Justice and Victims Minister Mike

Penning explained that it would contain measures to compel greater collaboration between

emergency services.

The Government has been keen to encourage collaboration between the blue light services since the

days of the Coalition as a way to achieve efficiencies in areas such as back-office operation costs.

Police and Crime Commissioners have already been enabled to take responsibility for their local fire

and rescue authority.

Though the Government has previously insisted that the separate services will remain operationally

independent, reports in the Guardian have suggested that this could allow senior fire officers with no

experience in policing to take charge of hiring all fire and police personnel.

However, the Opposition has suggested that this is simply driven by a desire to drive costs, while

the Fire Brigades Union has said that this was a “costly experiment with no guarantee of success”.

The Bill has already passed through the majority of its Commons consideration, but will run out of

time to go through the Lords before the end of the current Parliamentary year. It will likely thus be

subject to a Carry-Over Motion in order to allow it to proceed to the Upper Chamber as the 2016-17

session begins.

A perennial feature of the Parliamentary landscape at present due to its wide-ranging nature and

special scrutiny and evidence-hearing procedures, at the close of the 2015-16 session of Parliament,

the High Speed Rail (London-West Midlands) Bill was being considered by its dedicated Committee

in the House of Lords. It will be carried over into the next session and ministers hope it will receive

Royal Assent by the end of the year.

Two important decisions are expected to be taken on the project in the next 12 months. Ministers are

expected to announce the route for Phase 2 of HS2 in the Autumn and then introduce a hybrid Bill in

2017 to legislate to get the project to Crewe by 2027.

Page 22: DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 €¦ · DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 The Government’s legislative programme for the 2016-17 session of Parliament will be

22

DeHavilland Information Services Ltd 2016 www.dehavilland.co.uk

Another piece of legislation currently in the throes of consideration is the controversial Investigatory

Powers Bill. Despite legislation in this area having a history of accelerated Parliamentary passage,

time has run out for this to pass during the current session, and the Bill thus looks to be subject to a

Carry-Over Motion to allow it to continue after the State Opening.

In the same boat is the Finance (No. 2) Bill, the annual legislation underpinning the Budget. A

legislative necessity, it too will be brought over to complete its passage in the coming months.