Letter to the Chairman of the Committee from the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice

In its Special Report covering Departmental Returns for 2006 the Committee invited a response from the Government concerning the action which departments were taking in respect of the instruments reported by the Committee in 2006 and earlier years on which action remained outstanding. I am sorry that it did not prove possible to respond in the timescale which the Committee suggested. Departmental responses were due 26 October 2007 but unfortunately, arising out of the Machinery of Government changes that took place last year, many responses were delayed and not received until January.

The Government welcomes the Committee's reports and the constructive way in which the Committee and its advisers deal with the many instruments which it has to consider. Many of the Committee's comments lead to an improvement in the overall quality of delegated legislation for which we must all be striving to achieve.

In order to minimise the number of comments from the Committee, departments are being encouraged to take up the offer to submit early drafts of instruments to the Committee's legal advisers for comment ahead of these being made. Those departments who are already availing themselves of this opportunity are finding it useful and should reduce the risk of the Committee reporting an instrument.

In its report the Committee noted that, since its last annual report, departments had improved their performance in that there had been a marked overall reduction in the number of instruments that had been reported in 2006 on which action remained outstanding. In this response to the Committee I am pleased to be able to report that this trend has continued and that an increasing number of departments have taken the necessary corrective action which the Committee has suggested. Where departments have outstanding action then they are being urged to complete this at the earliest opportunity.

We also note the Committee's comments about the failure by departments in some cases to explain why "expectations" previously created were not met. Departments have been asked to ensure that they provide this information in all cases in future returns.

The following table summarises the current situation in respect of the instruments reported during 2006 and earlier years.

Department	Instruments with points outstanding at 1 April 2007 (by current departmental responsibility)	Instruments with agreed action outstanding at 1 February 2008
Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (formerly Department of Trade & Industry)	9[2]	7
Department for Children, Schools and Families (formerly DfES)	7[2]	2
Department for Communities and Local Government (formerly ODPM)	2	2
Department for Culture, Media and Sport	0	0
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs	13[1]	9
Department of Health	6	3
Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (formerly part of DfES and DTI)	5	3
Department for Transport	5 [1]	2
Department for Work and Pensions	3	2
Foreign & Commonwealth Office	0	0
Food Standards Agency	2 [1]	0
HM Revenue & Customs	2 [1]	0
HM Treasury	0	0
Home Office	2	0
Ministry of Defence	2 [1]	1
Ministry of Justice (formerly Department for Constitutional Affairs)	8 [2]	2
Northern Ireland Court Service	1	1
Northern Ireland Office (incl Home Office (NI))	6	6
Privy Council Office	0	0
Total	72 [11]	40

The annex to this letter details the responses from individual departments in respect of the instruments reported.

I hope the Committee will agree that this response highlights the improving trend in dealing with the Committee's comments which I hope will again be highlighted when departments respond to the Committee's survey in relation to its 2007 reports.

I am copying this letter to the Ministerial Heads of Departments.

26 February 2008