Lord Boswell of Aynho

The Balance of Competences Review concluded in December 2014. It was the most comprehensive analysis of the UK’s relationship with the EU ever undertaken. The Review involved a large number of Departments across Whitehall to produce the 32 reports. The Review was based on the evidence and views received through widespread consultation with interested parties from across society. Across the whole review, departments received close to 2,300 evidence submissions. Departments held over 250 events, attended by around 2,100 stakeholders.

It was important that what is an unprecedented examination of EU membership was done with appropriate time and care. But the government is also very conscious of the need to ensure value for money in everything that it does.

The cost to the Department for Transport (DfT) of the Balance of Competences (BOC) review is made up as follows:

(1) staff time

Work on the Review was allocated according to need to existing staff within the Department. Providing a full breakdown of staff time and costs would exceed the disproportionate cost threshold. DfT staff began work on the Review in October 2012 and continued until publication of the DfT BOC Transport report in February 2014.

(2) printing costs

DfT paid £3,123 for printing and publication of the Balance of Competences Transport report.

(3) running of engagement events

Engagement events to gather stakeholder views were held in-house in DfT and used internal meeting rooms, apart from one event which was held in Brussels. Costs were made up of staff time of those from DfT attending and facilitating these meetings. The 2 days of meetings in Brussels involved 2 DfT staff (at SCS1 and G7) and cost approximately £760.

(4) witness expenses

Across the whole of the Balance of Competences Review witness expenses amounted to approximately £2,255.

(5) publicity of the reports

Publicity for the Balance of Competences reports was conducted centrally by Cabinet Office. DfT undertook no separate report-specific publicity.

(6) any and all other associated costs

Nil.

Between July and December 2015, 434 Explanatory Memoranda on EU documents were submitted for scrutiny. There were 54 occasions when the Government supported decisions in the EU Council of Ministers before the scrutiny procedures had been completed by either one or both Scrutiny Committees. In each case the Government wrote to the Scrutiny Committees to explain the reasons why it was important for the Government to support the proposal before the scrutiny process could be completed or where the Committees were unable to provide a waiver for the Government to support the proposal whilst retaining the issue under scrutiny. As with previous six-monthly periods, the largest category of instrument were fast-moving EU restrictive measures where there were overrides on 40 such measures (74 per cent of the total number) of which 12 measures addressed the situation in Iran.

The figures requested are set out below:

I refer the noble Lord to my answer of 29 July 2015 (HL1633) which presented the figures for overrides for the period January-June 2015. That answer contained two errors. In a letter dated 16 September 2015 to the Chairs of the two Scrutiny Committees, the Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Aylesbury (Mr Lidington), undertook to correct the errors when providing figures for the period July-December 2015. One Foreign and Commonwealth Office override on the Council decision extending the mandate of the EU Special Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina had been counted twice. This brings the overall total down from 90 to 89. The total in the House of Lords (54) is unchanged since the Committee cleared that proposal before adoption, but it does reduce the number declared for the House of Commons from 86 to 85. The answer also stated that the 39 measures (the largest category of the total) were the Common Foreign and Security Policy restrictive measures. A recalculation has shown the figure to be 38. The earlier answer also highlighted an unresolved issue of whether an override needed to be recorded against a Commission Communication on the Paris Protocol (‘A Blueprint for tackling Global Climate Change beyond 2020’) because discussion with the European Scrutiny Committee had at that stage not been concluded. It was subsequently agreed that agreement of the document did not need to be recorded as a scrutiny override.

The Government strongly supports an effective Parliamentary scrutiny system and will always seek to avoid breaching the Scrutiny Reserve Resolution. Where this is not possible, the Government will continue to account for the circumstances of each override in writing to the Committees.

Between January to June 2015, 368 Explanatory Memoranda were submitted. Of the 90 overrides in this period, 73 (81 per cent) of overrides occurred after the dissolution of Parliament when one or both Houses were unable to carry out their scrutiny function. Of the 90 overrides across both Houses, 39 were on fast-moving EU restrictive measures including 11 measures to address the situation in Ukraine.

The figures requested are set out in the table below, which excludes reference to a Commission Communication on the Paris Protocol (‘A Blueprint for tackling Global Climate Change beyond 2020’) because discussion with the European Scrutiny Committee has not yet concluded whether this constitutes an override.

The Balance of Competences Review concluded in December. It was the most comprehensive analysis of the UK’s relationship with the EU ever undertaken. The Review involved a large number of Departments across Whitehall to produce the 32 reports. The Review was based on the evidence and views received through widespread consultation with interested parties from across society. Across the whole review, departments received close to 2,300 evidence submissions. Departments held over 250 events, attended by around 2,100 stakeholders.

The breakdown of costs requested are as follows:

(1) Providing a full breakdown of staff time and costs would exceed the disproportionate cost threshold, but the staff cost of the Review was borne entirely within existing staff budgets.

(2) The printing and publication costs for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) were £20,366. These costs covered copies of all 32 reports.

(3) The FCO spent approximately £15,740 on running engagement events.

(4) Across the whole of the Balance of Competences Review witness expenses amounted to approximately £2,255 which were borne by the FCO.

(5) The FCO did not spend any money on publicity of the reports utilising existing free social media and internet channels.

(6) The FCO spent approximately £17,450 on other associated costs.

The Government seeks to avoid breaching the Scrutiny Reserve Resolutions, continuing to account for overrides in writing to the Committees. The European Union Committee’s Report on 2013-14 (House of Lords Paper 6) published on 1 July 2014, recognised that continued positive engagement between the Committee’s secretariat and Departments has seen the number of overrides fall significantly since 2010, noting that many of the overrides that continue to be recorded relate to sensitive and fast-moving foreign policy matters, which cannot be made public beforehand, and where a scrutiny override may be difficult to avoid. That remained the case in the period July-December 2014 where, of the 49 overrides across both houses, 36 (73%) were in this category, including 22 measures to address the continuing crisis in Ukraine and the Crimea and Sevastopol region and 6 measures against Syria. The Government regrets that a small number were the result of substandard handling of the scrutiny process – this is clearly not good enough, and in these cases the Department concerned has taken action to strengthen scrutiny and prevent reoccurrences. This includes holding scrutiny workshops and talks from Ministers and Senior Civil Servants to make clear that effective scrutiny is a top priority. The European Scrutiny Committee has recorded 1 additional override not in the total figure of 49 relating to the Government’s support for a partial general approach on the draft Data Protection Regulation. The Government is considering the Committee’s view and will shortly respond to the Committee. During this period, 412 Explanatory Memoranda were submitted.

The figures requested are set out below:

There is no central record of the overall cost of the review. Each Department was responsible for allocating its own resources to meet its priorities, including delivering the reports on which it led or to which it had an interest in contributing.

As you will be aware, the Balance of Competences Review concluded in December. It was the most comprehensive analysis of the UK’s relationship with the EU ever undertaken. The Review involved a large number of Departments across Whitehall to produce the 32 reports. The Review was based on the evidence and views received through widespread consultation with interested parties from across society. Across the whole review, Departments received close to 2,300 evidence submissions. Departments held over 250 events, attended by around 2,100 stakeholders.

It was important that what is an unprecedented examination of EU membership was done with appropriate time and care. But the Government is also very conscious of the need to ensure value for money in everything that it does.

The Home Office participated in three reports as part of the Balance of Competences review: Asylum and non-EU Migration; Free movement of persons (jointly with DWP); and Police and Criminal Justice (jointly with the Ministry of Justice). Work on the Reviews was allocated, according to need, to existing staff within the Department. Providing a full breakdown of staff time and costs would exceed the disproportionate cost threshold.

The total cost to the Home Office for printing and publication of the Asylum and non-EU Migration, Free Movement of Persons, and Police and Criminal Justice reports was £8088.08.

The Home Office hosted or jointly hosted a total of a number of engagement events for the three reports, including events in Edinburgh and Brussels. We estimate that the total cost incurred by the Home Office for all of these events was £2200. Across the whole of the Balance of Competences Review witness expenses amounted to approximately £2,255.00.

The Home Office did not incur any other associated costs as part of the Balance of Competence Review.

The Council Decision concerning the United Kingdom’s participation in provisions of the Schengen acquis gave effect to the decision of the House of Lords on 17 November that the Government should re-join a package of 35 measures following the exercise of the UK's opt-out under Protocol 36 to the Treaties on the functioning of the EU (the 2014 opt-out decision). The Government accepts that the draft of this document should have been deposited earlier and apologises for the delay in its provision to the Committee.

Whilst we have noted the wishes of the Committee for an oral statement on the override, the Government does not believe it to be necessary given the number of debates and the extensive engagement with both Houses of Parliament and their Committees on the Protocol 36 op-out. We have responded to the Committee's correspondence on this matter and a written statement was laid in Parliament on the 10th December.

The Council Decision concerning the United Kingdom’s participation in provisions of the Schengen acquis gave effect to the decision of the House of Lords on 17 November that the Government should re-join a package of 35 measures following the exercise of the UK's opt-out under Protocol 36 to the Treaties on the functioning of the EU (the 2014 opt-out decision). The Government accepts that the draft of this document should have been deposited earlier and apologises for the delay in its provision to the Committee.

Whilst we have noted the wishes of the Committee for an oral statement on the override, the Government does not believe it to be necessary given the number of debates and the extensive engagement with both Houses of Parliament and their Committees on the Protocol 36 op-out. We have responded to the Committee's correspondence on this matter and a written statement was laid in Parliament on the 10th December.

The Council Decision concerning the United Kingdom’s participation in provisions of the Schengen acquis gave effect to the decision of the House of Lords on 17 November that the Government should re-join a package of 35 measures following the exercise of the UK's opt-out under Protocol 36 to the Treaties on the functioning of the EU (the 2014 opt-out decision). The Government accepts that the draft of this document should have been deposited earlier and apologises for the delay in its provision to the Committee.

Whilst we have noted the wishes of the Committee for an oral statement on the override, the Government does not believe it to be necessary given the number of debates and the extensive engagement with both Houses of Parliament and their Committees on the Protocol 36 op-out. We have responded to the Committee's correspondence on this matter and a written statement was laid in Parliament on the 10th December.

Section 102 of the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 will expand the special regard duties on decision makers for designated heritage assets. We intend to commence this section at the same time as the new decision-making test under section 93 which involves the introduction of National Development Management Policies. We will consult on draft National Development Management Policies in due course.

As you will be aware, the Balance of Competences Review concluded in December. It was the most comprehensive analysis of the UK’s relationship with the EU ever undertaken. The Review involved a large number of Departments across Whitehall to produce the 32 reports. The Review was based on the evidence and views received through widespread consultation with interested parties from across society.

It was important that what is an unprecedented examination of EU membership was done with appropriate time and care. But the government is also very conscious of the need to ensure value for money in everything that it does.

The Ministry of Justice produced four reports as part of the Balance of Competences review: Fundamental Rights; Information Rights; Civil Judicial Cooperation (including family matters); and Police and Criminal Justice (jointly with the Home Office). Work on the Review was allocated according to need to existing staff within the Department. Providing a full breakdown of staff time and costs would exceed the disproportionate cost threshold.

The total cost to the Ministry of Justice for printing and publication of the four reports was £10,210.39. The printing and publication costs for the Police and Criminal Justice report were split equally with the Home Office.

The Ministry of Justice hosted, or jointly hosted, 19 engagement events for the four reports, including events in London, Edinburgh, Belfast and Brussels. We estimate that the total cost incurred by the Ministry of Justice for all of these events was £7,140.

Across the whole of the Balance of Competences Review witness expenses amounted to approximately £2,255.00.

The Ministry of Justice did not incur any costs in publicising the reports, or any other associated costs as part of the Balance of Competence Review.