Parliamentary Monitor 2021 - Alice Lilly | Hannah White | Paul Shepley

In the face of backbench anger and attempts to use legislation to overturn the cuts – and after condemnation from the Speaker – the government instead allowed a vote on a narrowly drafted motion that did not offer MPs the option of overturning the cuts.7 But it was not just the government’s backbenchers who were restive. [...] In October 2020, the Science and Technology and Health and Social Care committees launched a joint inquiry, “Coronavirus: lessons learnt”, to examine key aspects of the UK government’s response including the deployment of lockdown and government communications; impact on the care sector; use of evidence; testing and contact tracing; and the vaccine roll-out.12 The joint nature of the inquiry meant. [...] For example, the chairs of the three territorial office committees, and the Health and Social Care Committee attended the Science and Technology Committee’s session with the chief medical and scientific officers of the four UK administrations in April 2020.13 The Public Accounts Committee also invited the chairs of the Treasury, Science and Technology, HCLG, Defence and BEIS committees to its “who. [...] The end of the transition period meant an end to the application of EU law in Great Britain – although under the Northern Ireland protocol, more than 300 EU acts will continue to apply in Northern Ireland.17 This changed the scrutiny needs and requirements of the UK parliament, and the committee structure in both Houses changed in response. [...] Its former chair, Hilary Benn, expressed frustration that this meant there was little time for the committee to scrutinise the content of the deal in any detail and so gain a better understanding of the implications of the end of the transition period.18 The European Scrutiny Committee remains in place and will continue to monitor EU documents, their implications, and the functioning of the two UK.