The House of Lords Constitution Committee has today published the second of three reports as part of its inquiry into the constitutional implications of COVID-19, looking at the impact of the pandemic on Parliament.
The report considers the significant challenges for the operation of Parliament since the start of the pandemic. In particular it focuses on the House of Lords and the difficulties it has faced in fulfilling its constitutional responsibilities of holding the Government to account and scrutinising legislation adequately - as well as the opportunities presented by the short-term changes in response to COVID-19.
Hybrid proceedings
The report outlines the impact on the House of Lords, with particular reference to hybrid proceedings, which has resulted in the House's essential scrutiny role, which was already in need of strengthening, become less effective. This is particularly significant given the nature of the emergency powers the Government used - an issue that will be considered further in the committee's next report.
The committee has called on the Government to prioritise Parliament when making significant policy announcements, regarding the pandemic and more generally, as well as ensuring that departments are adequately resourced to respond fully to questions in a timely manner.
The report also highlights, however, that the impact of virtual proceedings and remote voting has presented an opportunity to do things differently and better in the longer-term.
Longer-term resilience of Parliament
The report recommends that the House administration should continue to develop its capacity and capability to support virtual proceedings in case this is required to support Parliament's future business continuity arrangements or the restoration of the Palace of Westminster.
The report also recommends the House of Lords Commission conduct a lessons learned exercise regarding Parliament's response to the pandemic, as part of revising its business continuity plans.
The committee goes on to say that the apparent lack of support from the Government for the restoration and renewal programme is regrettable. Parliament has demonstrated resilience in the face of the pandemic yet the continued deterioration of the Palace of Westminster increases the risk of both Houses being forced to resort to virtual methods of working in future.
Baroness Taylor of Bolton, Chair of the Constitution Committee said: “Despite the restrictions imposed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the efforts of staff from across Parliament and the members of the House of Lords Commission and Procedure and Privileges Committee ensured that the House of Lords continued fulfilling its constitutional role so far as circumstances permitted. The speed of Parliament's response to the pandemic was all the more remarkable considering that its plans had to be developed from scratch and we commend everyone involved.
“As Parliament emerges from COVID-19, the House of Lords should reflect on its experiences during the pandemic and consider how it can fulfil its role more effectively once things return to normal.
“We recognise the Procedure and Privileges Committee and the House of Lords as a whole will want to consider the merits of retaining aspects of hybrid proceedings and new voting arrangements as options after the pandemic. We welcome the benefits remote proceedings have brought and recommend that those considerations should take into account the impact of any retention on the effectiveness of the House in discharging its constitutional roles of scrutinising legislation and holding the Government to account, inclusivity and business continuity”.
