The Parliamentary Standards Act 2009: A Constitutional Dangerous Dogs Measure?

N. Parpworth
{"title":"The Parliamentary Standards Act 2009: A Constitutional Dangerous Dogs Measure?","authors":"N. Parpworth","doi":"10.1111/J.1468-2230.2010.00793.X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The scandal which broke over MPs' abuses of the allowances system during the course of the last parliamentary session shows little sign of abating. As a result of an audit undertaken by Sir Thomas Legg, some MPs have been required to repay sums which were successfully claimed up to five years ago. Although this development has been welcomed by the public, it has been condemned by some in Parliament as being retrospective and unfair. In this article, the discussion focuses on the key provisions of the Parliamentary Standards Act 2009 which was enacted in order to tackle the issues raised by the expenses scandal. It considers their import and how they are likely to apply in practice. Since the Act is a further example of ‘fast-track’ legislation, there was no opportunity for pre-legislative scrutiny. This may help to explain why the Act differs in several important respects from the Bill which was originally introduced. It is highly likely that the 2009 Act will be the subject of post-legislative scrutiny, especially since it contains a renewal provision.","PeriodicalId":426546,"journal":{"name":"Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review","volume":"71 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1468-2230.2010.00793.X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The scandal which broke over MPs' abuses of the allowances system during the course of the last parliamentary session shows little sign of abating. As a result of an audit undertaken by Sir Thomas Legg, some MPs have been required to repay sums which were successfully claimed up to five years ago. Although this development has been welcomed by the public, it has been condemned by some in Parliament as being retrospective and unfair. In this article, the discussion focuses on the key provisions of the Parliamentary Standards Act 2009 which was enacted in order to tackle the issues raised by the expenses scandal. It considers their import and how they are likely to apply in practice. Since the Act is a further example of ‘fast-track’ legislation, there was no opportunity for pre-legislative scrutiny. This may help to explain why the Act differs in several important respects from the Bill which was originally introduced. It is highly likely that the 2009 Act will be the subject of post-legislative scrutiny, especially since it contains a renewal provision.
2009年议会标准法案:一项符合宪法的危险狗措施?
在上一届议会会议期间,议员滥用津贴制度的丑闻几乎没有减弱的迹象。托马斯·莱格爵士(Sir Thomas Legg)进行的审计结果显示,一些国会议员被要求偿还五年前就已成功申领的款项。尽管这一发展受到了公众的欢迎,但议会中的一些人却谴责它是回顾性的和不公平的。在这篇文章中,讨论的重点是2009年议会标准法案的关键条款,该法案是为了解决报销丑闻所引发的问题而颁布的。它考虑了它们的重要性以及它们如何可能在实践中应用。由于该法案是“快速通道”立法的又一个例子,因此没有机会进行立法前审查。这可能有助于解释为什么该法案在几个重要方面与最初提出的法案不同。2009年法案极有可能成为立法后审查的对象,特别是因为它包含了更新条款。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信