The inclusion of a Permissive Extent Clause (PEC) in the Fisheries Bill was extremely regrettable and contrary to the constitutional relationship. We do not agree with the Government’s assertion that it was a “legitimate act” and “soundly within the constitutional relationship”, but rather consider it to have been a serious interference in long-established constitutional principles for short-term political reasons. We expect that the usual approach—mandated in the Ministry of Justice’s own gu...

The inclusion of a Permissive Extent Clause (PEC) in the Fisheries Bill was extremely regrettable and contrary to the constitutional relationship. We do not agree with the Government’s assertion that it was a “legitimate act” and “soundly within the constitutional relationship”, but rather consider it to have been a serious interference in long-established constitutional principles for short-term political reasons. We expect that the usual approach—mandated in the Ministry of Justice’s own guidance—of consultation and consent with regards to all future PECs will now prevail. Type: conclusion | Number: 19 | Paragraph: 71 | Response status: partially_accepted Government response: 54. The Government agrees with the Committee that the Government should consult the Crown Dependencies in advance of including a PEC in any legislation that may affect them. 55. The inclusion of a PEC in UK legislation does not constitute legislating for the Crown Dependencies as the mere fact of a