Regulator's extended powers may be unworkable without scrutiny - EXCLUSIVE

Allen & Overy partner Däna Burstow is concerned that, because the new powers will mostly be introduced through secondary legislation, they will not be subject to sufficient scrutiny.

She told PP: "The regulations might be made in a way which does not lead to as much parliamentary scrutiny as they warrant.

"My understanding is they will be put to both houses but it is a ‘yes or no’ vote, rather than a line by line analysis in committee. If that is the way they are going to do it, the question is whether it is right."

Burstow added: "Historically we have had the opportunity to lobby, for something this important I imagine it is going to cause some unrest."

Burstow said private equity groups will be concerned, as well as lawyers and consultants who could find it difficult to give sensible advice on the topic.

She said: "We do not have a particularly strong view for or against this but what we find is that quite often regulations can be unworkable or very difficult to use in practice – even when they have that parliamentary scrutiny. We have to hope that the consultation is extensive."

Linklaters senior associate Nick Laird said: "The majority of the detail will be in the regulations. I am hoping and anticipating they will legally limit the extent of the powers. There needs to be clarity and certainty."

A department for work and pensions spokeswoman said the powers would be brought into force by a Bill that would be subject to the usual parliamentary scrutiny.

She added: "Further, any regulation made under this power would be subject to a further consultation and to the affirmative procedure.

"This means the new regulations would have to be agreed by both the House of Commons and House of Lords before coming into effect, providing further opportunity for parliamentary scrutiny."