Debate contribution: Standing Order 42A
Debate contribution by Ms Kellie Armstrong on .
- MLA
- Ms Kellie Armstrong
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 5 October 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Committee Business
- Heading
- Standing Order 42A
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5773994
Read the official Assembly record
Text
On behalf of the Committee on Procedures, I am very pleased to bring the motion to the Assembly to amend Standing Order 42A, which sets out the procedural arrangements for managing legislative consent motions (LCMs) at the Assembly. The origin of the proposed changes to Standing Order 42A goes back to March 2022, when the Assembly endorsed the previous Committee on Procedures' report on its inquiry into legislative consent motions. Although that Committee considered that the fundamental reform of the principles underpinning the Assembly LCM procedures was unnecessary, it noted that there had been a number of instances where either the procedures had not been followed or they had been followed but issues had nonetheless arisen. It was therefore of the view that there was scope to make improvements to the practice and the arrangements for managing LCMs that would enhance the Assembly's ability to carry out its scrutiny and bring more transparency to the process. The report made seven recommendations, a number of which required changes to Standing Order 42A. More recently, the Speaker expressed concerns at the start of the plenary sitting on 9 June 2025 relating to the issue of Assembly legislative consent, including that, on some occasions, Ministers were not engaging with the Assembly in a timely manner when seeking such consent. The Procedures Committee sought the views of the Speaker on whether the implementation of the changes to Standing Order 42A that were recommended by the previous Committee would assist in addressing the issues that he had raised, and he confirmed that, in his view, they were still relevant, and that he would welcome the proposed changes being brought forward. The Committee also received correspondence from several Statutory Committees and the Chairpersons' Liaison Group, highlighting issues with the LCM process and requesting that consideration be given to what could be done to strengthen and enhance opportunities for Assembly and Committee scrutiny of LCMs. I am sure that we all agree that it is always preferable that, wherever possible, legislation on devolved matters be made by the Assembly. However, there are some circumstances, such as in relation to maintaining parity, or where there is a need for simultaneous enactment across two or more jurisdictions, where the use of an LCM is appropriate. Given the issues that had been clearly identified with the current LCM procedures, the Committee on Procedures commenced work in February of this year on proposals to implement the recommendations in the previous Committee's inquiry report that required changes to Standing Order 42A. The Committee also considered a proposal from the Minister of Justice to change the definition of "relevant day" for an LCM arising as a result of an amendment to a Bill. The outcome of that work is the motion before the Assembly today, which makes a number of changes to Standing Order 42A by implementing four of the previous Committee's inquiry recommendations and changing the definition of "relevant day". Some restructuring and renumbering of the paragraphs has taken place to ensure that the revised Standing Order remains coherent and workable, together with some minor changes to language to ensure consistency. The first of the main changes being proposed removes the word "normally" from Standing Order 42A(4). The aim of the change is to encourage greater compliance by Ministers with the 10-working-day requirement for laying a legislative consent memorandum, or a memorandum explaining why a legislative consent motion is not sought, which is reflected in revised Standing Order 42A(5).
The change implements recommendation 1 of the inquiry's report, in which the previous Committee concluded that
"Executive Ministers must improve the timeliness of when they lay memoranda",
and saw
"no reason why in normal circumstances such memoranda should not be laid within 10 working days."
The next substantive change, reflected in paragraphs 6 and 15 of revised Standing Order 42A, implements recommendation 2 of the inquiry report and makes
"explicit provision for a Minster [sic] to lay a memorandum before the Assembly, normally within 10 working days, where a relevant Bill has been introduced to Parliament and where the Minister has not yet taken any decision on whether to ask the Assembly to give its consent."
The indicative memorandum should explain why the Minister has not laid a consent memorandum or a memorandum explaining why a consent motion is not being sought and is subject to the same 10-working-day period as those memoranda. If an indicative memorandum is laid, the Minister should, as soon as is practicable thereafter, lay either a legislative consent memorandum or explain why consent is not being sought. Providing for an indicative memorandum in Standing Order 42A will ensure that the Assembly remains informed of any Bills that require legislative consent even in circumstances where a Minister has not yet decided whether they intend to seek consent and removes any doubt on the part of Ministers that such an approach can and should be taken. The previous Committee recognised that exceptional circumstances may prevent a Minister from laying a relevant memorandum within the period of 10 working days and recommended that provision should be made to cover such an eventuality. Paragraphs 7 and 8 of revised Standing Order 42A make provision that, in exceptional circumstances, Ministers may lay a relevant memorandum as soon as possible after the period of 10 working days has elapsed, with a requirement to explain the reason for the delay in laying the memorandum. A "relevant memorandum" is defined as a legislative consent memorandum, an indicative memorandum or a memorandum explaining why consent is not being sought. In response to the challenges facing Committees regarding the timescales provided for in Standing Order 42A, the previous Committee recommended that the Standing Order:
"should be amended to allow for more flexibility ... (where this is possible) based on the planned timescale for the passage for the specific Bill through Parliament."
Paragraph 12 of revised Standing Order 42A makes provision for the appropriate Statutory Committee to bring a motion to the Assembly seeking the Assembly's approval to extend the period of 15 working days to report its opinion to the Assembly in line with the timetable for the Bill's passage through Westminster. It is not expected that that provision will need to be used extensively, particularly if Ministers adhere to the procedures, but it will enable a Committee to seek an extension to the time period when necessary and where circumstances allow. The timescales for moving a consent motion, which are set out in paragraph 13 of the revised Standing Order, have also been adjusted to cover circumstances in which the Assembly has agreed to an extension to the time period for the Committee to report its opinion. The last substantive change is to the definition of "relevant day". Standing Order 42A currently provides that the relevant day is:
"the day the Bill completes the stage in the United Kingdom Parliament during which an amendment is made to the Bill".
That differs from the position in the Scottish Parliament and the Senedd, where there are explicit provisions for the relevant day to be the day on which an amendment is:
"tabled by a Minister of the Crown or published with the name of a Minister of the Crown in support".
The approach taken in Scotland and Wales expressly recognises that, where an amendment is likely to be made by a UK Minister, there should be an opportunity at that point for the relevant Minister to bring the matter to the attention of the devolved legislatures. In its inquiry report, the previous Committee on Procedures suggested that:
"it would be sensible to consider making similar explicit provision when Standing Order 42A is amended"
but did not make a specific recommendation. The Minister of Justice subsequently wrote to the Committee to ask it to consider making the change. Paragraph 16 of revised Standing Order 42A expands the existing definition of "relevant day" to provide for the change and is consistent with the approach adopted by the Scottish Parliament and the Senedd. As a result of that change, consideration of an amendment can take place earlier. To enable it to determine whether Parliament should legislate on a devolved matter, the Assembly needs sufficient time and sufficient information to inform its decision. It is therefore important that the procedures that are in place to facilitate that are robust and effective. The motion tabled by the Committee on Procedures provides for revisions to Standing Order 42A that will support that aim and strengthen the ability of the Assembly to carry out its scrutiny role in relation to legislative consent.
On behalf of the Committee, a letter has been sent to all MLAs setting out the background to the proposed changes and providing information on what they cover. I hope that that is useful and will assist with today's debate. In closing, in my capacity as Chairperson of the Committee, I thank the Deputy Chairperson and the members of the Committee for their constructive approach and detailed input to this issue and to the work of the Committee more generally. I also thank the Clerk's team and those who provided us with legal advice throughout the process. I hope that Members will support the changes to Standing Order 42A. I look forward to hearing anybody who wants to speak on the issue. I will quickly talk in my capacity as an MLA. Alliance supports the change. It provides clarity for Ministers, meets the Speaker's requirements and will provide Statutory Committees with respect for their place and scrutiny.
1,583 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Awaiting analysis
This record has not been analysed yet. It is not counted in any total until it has been assessed.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.