Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments Eighteenth Report


APPENDIX 4

Memorandum by the Department of Education and Employment

ACTION FOR EDUCATION AND EMPLOYMENT SOUTH EAST SHEFFIELD EDUCATION ACTION ZONE ORDER 2000 (S.I. 2000/863)

BRISTOL EDUCATION ACTION ZONE ORDER 2000 (S.I. 2000/865)

GREAT YARMOUTH ACHIEVEMENT EDUCATION ACTION ZONE ORDER 2000 (S.I. 2000/867)

  1. I write in reply to Mr. Hennessy's letter of 12th April 2000 notifying Mr. Macrae of a request for a memorandum to be submitted in relation to the above statutory instruments. The Committee requested the submission of a memorandum on the following point:

    "In each of these there are descriptions of the qualifications for appointment to the Forum in terms of a person who appears to the Forum to represent an interest (articles 5(a), 5(b), (c),(d),(k) and 5 respectively). In the corresponding provisions for removal (by the Forum) from office, the pre-condition for removal is expressed, in No. 863 in terms of the appointee no longer meeting the appointment description (article 10(d); in No. 865, in terms of the appointee being decided as no longer meeting the appointment description (article 10(d)); and, in No. 867, in terms of the appointee no longer appearing to meet the appointment description (article 10(d)). Explain the reasons for these distinctions between the subjective and objective pre-conditions for removal of appointees whose qualification is identified by the same (subjective) description."

    

  2. The description given for the preconditions for removal of appointees differs in all three statutory instruments merely because different lawyers were involved in the drafting process and because the instruments were prepared in succession, with lawyers aiming to improve the drafting of successive Orders.

  3. The department accepts that in view of the subjective description given for qualification for particular appointments to the Forum, it would have been most appropriate for a subjective description to have been given for the preconditions for removal of such appointees in Article 10.

  4. The wording given in the Great Yarmouth Achievement Education Action Zone Order 2000 is therefore to be preferred and lawyers will aim to use this wording if any similar Education Action Zone Orders need to be drafted in the future.

  5. The department recognises that it is desirable for consistent terms to be used when drafting statutory instruments covering similar subject matter. The department will aim to achieve such consistency in future statutory instruments.

18th April 2000


 
previous page contents next page

House of Lords home page Parliament home page House of Commons home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2000
Prepared 12 June 2000