Westminster update: Law Society gives evidence on treaty scrutiny

Practising certificate fee survey

Share your thoughts on how we can better support you and your practice over the year ahead by responding to our annual practising certificate fee survey.

Law Society gives evidence on treaty scrutiny

Our head of public law, Arabella Lang, gave oral evidence to the House of Lords International Agreements Committee on Wednesday 23 March.

She emphasised the need to introduce greater parliamentary scrutiny for international treaties.

Lang appeared alongside individuals from similar academic backgrounds as part of the committee’s wider inquiry into treaty scrutiny.

The chair of the committee, Lord Fox (Liberal Democrat), asked whether there is scope for reform and whether there is a need for flexibility to bypass parliamentary scrutiny when the government is negotiating treaties.

Lang answered that reform is needed to increase accountability.

She emphasised the importance of flexibility but also noted that the need for parliamentary approval can be a strong negotiating tool.

Lang balanced this against the notion that parliamentary involvement can be proportionate to the treaty in question.

Lord Hannay (crossbench) leant on his diplomatic career to highlight that he was completely unaware that ratified treaties had no power for implementation by themselves but instead require domestic implementation.

He asked how this affects trust amongst nations if our signature does not necessarily mean adherence.

Lang answered that treaty guidance does state intention to ratify once any implementing legislation is in place but said more can be done to connect the two through setting out a timeline for the process.

Baroness Lawlor (Conservative) followed up to ask how the UK compares to other similar international systems.

Lang answered that the gradual evolution of the UK’s dualist system has made it an outlier compared to other nations and that a majority of other dualist systems require parliamentary scrutiny in some form.

She mentioned the Norwegian system’s use of committees and Australia’s process of grading treaties by significance, with different levels of scrutiny applied for each grade.

The committee will continue its scrutiny before producing a final report of recommendations to the government.

MPs push for closer trading ties with the EU

On 24 April, Andrew Lewin (Labour) brought together cross-party interest in the UK’s trading relationship with the EU by leading a Westminster Hall debate on the issue.

This follows on from a joint letter by 70 Labour MPs calling on the government to negotiate a youth mobility scheme and pursue deeper trade, security and cultural ties with our closest trading partner.

Lewin opened the debate by emphasising the importance of maintaining strong trade relations with the EU, particularly in the services sector.

He argued that the UK must ensure that barriers to trade in services are minimised to support economic growth and competitiveness.

Lewin also highlighted the need for regulatory alignment to facilitate smoother trade and reduce costs for businesses operating across borders.

On youth mobility, he highlighted that Labour MPs are looking for a new, bespoke youth visa scheme for UK and EU citizens under 30.

As with all the UK’s existing schemes, he believes that it should be time-limited and subject to a cap on numbers, but argued that a bespoke scheme would extend new cultural, educational and economic opportunities to young people in the UK and the European Union.

The Liberal Democrats were keen on this initiative, with Sarah Olney arguing that such a scheme would:

• enhance cultural exchange
• provide opportunities for young people to gain valuable work experience
• strengthen bilateral relations

Olney also highlighted the importance of maintaining close ties with the EU to support economic stability and growth.

Chair of the Business and Trade Select Committee Liam Byrne (Labour) also added his support.

By focusing on services and innovation, he noted that “we have to advance co-operation by restoring mutual recognition of qualifications and I absolutely agree with the need for a visa-based, time-limited and number-capped scheme for youth mobility”.

The trade minister, Douglas Alexander, responded for the government but could not fit in all of his remarks due to the sheer number of MPs who wished to speak in the debate.

He responded to the question of a youth mobility scheme by noting that he would not provide a running commentary on negotiations with the EU.

He told the house that the government “made a clear manifesto commitment to bring down net migration and to have no return to free movement within the EU”.

This is a slight shift in the government’s previous position, of flat out dismissing the issue and one to watch as we move closer to the UK-EU summit in May.

Renters' Rights Bill continues scrutiny in the House of Lords

Detailed scrutiny of the Renters’ Rights Bill continued as it began its committee stage.

Members of the House of Lords had the opportunity to table amendments to the bill and ask the government to accept their proposed changes.

The Law Society continues to engage actively with the debate, pushing for changes on housing legal aid, rent repayment, grounds for possession and court resourcing.

We briefed in support of amendments from Liberal Democrat peer Baroness Thornhill and crossbencher Lord Best which will be debated in next week’s sessions.

This week focused on the:

• abolition of assured shorthold tenancies
• addition of a purpose clause
• impact of the bill on shared housing

Members from across the house raised the Law Society’s concerns over the:

• current limitations of housing legal aid
• importance of the courts being ready for the coming changes
• need for the regulation of property agents

It was Conservative peers who were most active in sharing the Law Society’s concerns, with Baroness Scott and Lord Jackson specifically referencing the Law Society’s calls.

Lord Jackson noted that “the Law Society in particular notes the potential increase in contested hearings in the short term, as landlords that would previously have used section 21, because it was less costly and less onerous, will now have to show good reason for eviction”.

The housing minister, Baroness Taylor (Labour), offered reassurances to the House on proper resourcing of the courts.

She noted that “the availability of court hearings is vital for tenants’ access to justice, and the government is working closely with our colleagues in the Ministry of Justice and HM Courts and Tribunals Service to make the possession process more efficient and easier to understand”.

After many hours of debate, all government-led amendments were accepted and none were pushed to a vote.

We will continue to monitor the debate as it progresses next week.

Coming up

We're working closely with MPs and peers to influence a number of bills before parliament:

• Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill have its report stage in the Commons, date to be confirmed
• Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill will have its second reading in the Lords on 1 May
• Crime and Policing Bill will continue its committee stage, which began on 27 March
• Data (Access and Use) Bill will have its report stage in the Commons on 7 May
• Employment Rights Bill will have its committee stage in the Lords on 29 April
• Mental Health Bill will have its second reading in the Commons, date to be confirmed
• Planning and Infrastructure Bill began its committee stage in the Commons on 24 April
• Renters' Rights Bill began its committee stage in the Lords on 22 April
• Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill will have its report stage in the Commons on 16 May