Readers of this site will be interested in Stephen Argument’s latest paper on delegated legislation, which he presented at the Australian-New Zealand Scrutiny of Legislation Conference in Perth earlier this month.
From the paper:
In this paper, I state my views about the particular importance of the availability of disallowance mechanisms to the role of parliamentary committees engaged in scrutiny of delegated legislation. In short, it is my view that disallowance motions can be a way of making sure that the Executive is reminded of both the power of parliamentary scrutiny committees and also the significance of the role that parliamentary scrutiny committees perform.
I state my views in the context of various contemporary events that (in my view) support the arguments that I make, including examples that I have identified through my work with the ACT and Senate committees and also including my perception of the significance of the way that the WA Parliament has approached “National Scheme” legislation in recent years. I also offer my views in relation to the “Strathclyde Review” in the United Kingdom (UK) and, in particular, argue that the Strathclyde Review (and the response to it) demonstrates how much better we do things in Australia, in comparison to the UK.
Other papers from the conference can be found on the WA Parliament site here.