In a previous post, I drew attention to the limitations – indeed the dangers – of the review by Lord Strathclyde, published in December, of how the House of Lords deals with secondary legislation. Two committees of the House have now weighed in with powerful critiques of the review. The Constitution Committee (on which I serve) and the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee develop similar points in identifying the flaws of the review. I have drawn attention to both reports in a post on Lords of the Blog.
A third committee, the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee (SLSC), is also undertaking a review. (As you will see from its report, the Delegated Powers Committee drew on my evidence to the SLSC.) The Strathclyde Review is starting to resemble a grand battleship under fire from a number of cruisers; it is not clear how much more is needed before it sinks beneath the waves.