I would say it’s been a quiet week in Parliament this week- there don’t seem to have been a huge amount of enormous stories, at least not for the general public. But never let it be said that I’m not willing to grab my canary, heft my pick, and head into the mines to bring you back glittering gold from across this sceptred isle. So what have we found this week?

Westminster

“Let’s stop consulting and just get it done!” It’s a cry we hear almost ludicrously often from decision-makers all over the country. Parliamentarians are some of the worst culprits, and the clarion call has gone up again this week in response to the Government’s position on the movement of animals. It is actually an interesting point, and one that we perhaps shouldn’t treat quite as dismissively as the first sentence might suggest. Of course there is a point at which we should stop consulting to get it done.

Deciding when that point falls might not be so easy- a glib, if not entirely helpful answer would be that we should stop consulting and make a decision when we have enough information to do so. That of course is a judgment call, but we would aver that in most circumstances it should be relatively clear when you have adequately discharged your consultation duties.

That’s not to say that consultation isn’t sometimes used as a delaying tactic for decision-making. We see it relatively often, usually when difficult or controversial decisions need to be made. In many ways, this is an equal but opposite sin to insufficient consultation. Even if undertaken genuinely (which we might doubt if it’s being done to delay) and not to try and secure the answer you want, repeated unnecessary consultation is offensive to the principles of good administration.

The question of when we have enough information to act is one that relates nicely to various debates in the Lords this week, where peers were debating the Elections Bill. We’ve commented previously (multiple times) on some of the more significant consultation failings of this one, and argued that the Government simply does not have enough information to be making the changes it is proposing. In addition to the major problems, there are a whole host of other smaller issues, many related to consultation and engagement that render this Bill of somewhat dubious provenance.

We’re working a little more on this (two days ago we had a meeting at Parliament to discuss issues around it), and monitoring the debate very closely. For now however, this would certainly appear to be a situation where the call should instead be “Let’s stop acting and just consult!”

Scotland

Two despatches from our compatriots up north this week, firstly a debate on fisheries management which has been given a boost with the recent publication of the draft future catching policy for Scotland. The Scottish Government has promised to run more consultation on implementation, as well as launching a new consultation on remote electronic monitoring of the fishing fleet. We can only hope that they will use appropriately novel techniques to ensure that fish, notoriously poor with technology, can appropriately respond.* Fish and chips anyone? It’s one which no doubt they’ll be keen to get right- the Scottish Government have been lightly nibbled on by the Court of Session in recent times over fisheries consultations.

Some frustrated debate in Holyrood as well about the Spaces for People programme, the initiative launched during the pandemic to provide temporary infrastructure to support exercise and healthy living. As with similar measures in England, whilst the general thrust of the programme was broadly supported, but there were significant problems with the practical aspects- particularly around disability and accessibility. Although the issues were prompted by the pandemic, there are general points to be learned from the whole experience, and we might look at putting together a bit of a ’lessons learned’ guide, if that’s something people would be interested in.

*This is of course a joke, but it does raise a point which we had a query about recently- the status of animals and animal rights in consultation. (Fish) food for thought, certainly.

ED: Enough with the fish jokes already.

Wales

Some interesting debate in Senedd Cymru this week, including a comment from the Minister for Education and the Welsh Language that possibly warrants a quick examination. The subject matter was the Tertiary Education and Research (Wales) Bill, which was recently reported on by the Children, Young People and Education Committee. One of the recommendations made by the Committee was that the statement of priorities of the proposed new Commission for Tertiary Education and Research should be accompanied by a statutory requirement for consultation. The Minister rejected the recommendation, commenting that these priorities were “high level and strategic” and did not “lend themselves to consultation”.

So, that brings us to the question: are strategic matters less amenable to consultation than non-strategic ones? A lot will of course come down to context, but I’m not sure in general that we would agree that there is a particular unsuitability to consultation. Strategy Is very important, and (almost by definition) can have an enormous impact on everything that follows down to the tactical and operational level, and an incorrect strategy can perpetuate negative impacts which are then difficult to counter at less overarching levels. Naturally, strategies can be more complex than purely operational matters, but that needn’t be an excuse not to consult- it just puts more of the onus on you to explain it well.

Northern Ireland

Yet more beautiful consideration on the subject of Private Member’s Bills in Northern Ireland, as the assembly examines the procedures that result in them. One of the recommendations of the inquiring Committee is to make pre-legislative consultation mandatory for privately drafted PMBs. You will recall in the past that we have mentioned that in both Scotland and Northern Ireland consultation on PMBs before introduction was mandatory- in actuality there’s a little bit of authorial sleight of hand there, and whilst it is largely true, it is within walking distance only of being whole and nothing but.

In the Northern Ireland Assembly there are two methods of bringing a PMB, either by bringing it through the PMB support unit (where there is an obligation of consultation), or by drafting it privately (where, up ‘til now there has not been a similar obligation). The proposals of the Committee would if they are accepted bring the two mechanisms in line with each other. We’re still in the research phase of our paper on pre-legislative scrutiny, expect it within the next couple of months, but this gives us further things to think about in what we feel is likely to be a growing area.