Ad Hoc Committee on the Procedural Consequences of Devolution

Minutes of Proceedings

Tuesday 22 September 1998 at 11.00am

In Long Gallery, Parliament Buildings

Present:Mr A McFarland

Mr D Hussey

Mr B Bell(representing Rt Hon J Taylor MP

Mr D Shipley-Dalton(representing Mr R Empey)

Rev W McCrea

Mr S Wilson

Mr P Berry (representing Mr I Paisley Jnr)

Mr B McElduff

Mr G McHugh

Ms M Nellis

Mr S Close

Mr C Wilson(representing Mr R McCartney QC MP)

Mr D Ervine

Prof M McWilliams(representing Ms J Morrice)

In attendance:Mr N Carson (Agenda Item 1 only)

Mr J Reynolds

2. It was agreed that the Ad Hoc Committee would adopt the rules of procedure which were being employed by other Committees of the Assembly. It was therefore AGREED that a substitute, who must be a Member of the Assembly, could attend, speak and vote at meetings of the Committee.

Election of Chairperson

3. Mr Carson asked for nominations for the position of chair of the Committee. Mr McFarland nominated Rt Hon J Taylor MP. This was seconded by Mr Bell. In the absence of Mr Taylor to accept the nomination, or, if elected, to take the chair, it was agreed that this nomination should be withdrawn.

1. Mr C Wilson nominated Mr S Close and this was seconded by Rev W McCrea. Mr Close indicated that he would be unable to chair the meeting and represent fully the views of his Party. He therefore declined the nomination.
2. Mr Ervine nominated Mr McFarland, seconded by Mr Close. Following a vote of those present, Mr McFarland was unanimously elected to chair the Committee.

After a short adjournment Mr McFarland took the chair.

Business of the Committee

3. The Chairman drew Members' attention to the timescale within which the Committee was expected to report. It was agreed that the Procedure Committee would be asked for leave to give the issues longer consideration. It was agreed that some of the issues were simple and that the Committee's views would be readily established. On other matters, particularly regarding Northern Ireland's input to European legislation, the views of the Committee could take some time to be clarified. Several Members commented on the importance of taking sufficient time to determine the best arrangements and that the Committee's consideration should not be unnecessarily foreshortened because of an unrealistic deadline imposed by the Procedure Committee. Prof McWilliams suggested that the Committee should aim to produce an Interim Report for the Assembly meeting of 6 October 1998 and that a further opportunity to offer views should be sought from both the Procedure Committee and the Assembly.

Correction to the Terms of Reference

4. The Chairman reported a correction to the text of the Committee's Terms of Reference. The words "and the United Kingdom Parliament" had been omitted from the text of the Order Paper (and consequently Hansard) for the motion put to the Assembly on 14 September. The revised wording was accepted as the clear and unambiguous intention of the proposition.

Business of the Committee

Background

5. Members considered the issues raised by the Procedure Committee's Press Notice No.9. A joint meeting with the Procedure Committee was suggested. Members also noted that the Assembly in Northern Ireland would assume devolved powers before the comparable bodies in Scotland and Wales. There were therefore limits on how much could be learnt from circumstances elsewhere. Similarly it was agreed that there would be limited value in considering the procedures of Dail Eireann.
6. The Committee discussed the potential for consultation and co-operation with the Scottish and Welsh bodies. The Chairman reminded Members that the key issue was how practice at Westminster could be revised.
7. A series of questions were logged:

• What protocols would apply to relationships between the Executive and Westminster?
• How would the Secretary of State relate to the Assembly?
• What relationship would exist between the Assembly and Westminster on reserved matters?
• How would Ministers in the Assembly relate to Ministers in Whitehall?
• What were the implications for joint operations?

1. It was AGREED that the Committee should recommend modifications to Standing Orders at Westminster to guarantee a consultative role for the Assembly on reserved matters. It was further AGREED that the Assembly should seek Westminster's agreement to refer all questions on devolved matters back to the Assembly. It was also AGREED that the committee would recommend that Northern Ireland Questions should be retained in the Westminster diary in terms of its duration and frequency in recognition of the considerable interest in reserved matters which would remain the responsibility of Westminster.

Request for further information

2. The Committee sought further information on current practice with regard to:

• the Northern Ireland Grand Committee;
• the Northern Ireland Select Committee;
• Northern Ireland Questions
• Other Questions
• Private Members Bills
• Standing Orders

1. Members questioned whether liaison between Westminster and the Assembly should happen at Ministerial, Committee or Member level. Concern was expressed about the limits on freedom of NI Ministers if, ultimately, authority remained at Westminster. After discussion it was AGREED that the committee would seek consideration and advice on the options for revising the current financial scrutiny arrangements. Members sought to clarify the relationship between the National Audit Office and the NI Audit Office; the Public Accounts Committee and a comparable body (if it were established by the Assembly) and the relationship between Departmental Accounting Officers and these bodies. Members noted the different Block Grant arrangements that applied in Northern Ireland.

Other Issues

2. Members sought clarification about why Northern Ireland was not mentioned in regard to changing practice with regard to subordinate legislation.
3. Members generally regarded the issue of Private Members' Bills in similar terms to Parliamentary Questions. In respect of devolved matters, the Committee regarded Westminster involvement as inappropriate. It was also suggested that the Committee might consider whether precedent existed from the previous operation of devolved Government in Northern Ireland.
4. The Chairman suggested, and it was agreed, that he should write to the Chairman of the Northern Ireland Select Committee notifying him of the Ad Hoc Committee's role in looking at relationships between Westminster and the Assembly.
5. The Chairman reported that neither the Scottish Office nor the Welsh Office intended to reply to the Procedure Committee's invitation.