I will stop repeating my continuing doubts about the legality of any form of EPR made under the Emergency Powers Act 1936 outside a state of Emergency.

Three Emergency Powers Regulations, all made without a State of Emergency being in effect, are being laid before Tynwald on the 20^th of October . The oldest of these was created on the 10^th of August 2020. In sharp contrast to those EPRs made during the Emergency, more than two months will have passed before it is considered by Tynwald. Continuation EPRs do not need to be approved within a fixed timelimit – unlike normal EPRs – but it is worth stressing that the legislation does not refer to the next routine sitting of Tynwald, but that “the responsible authority for the document must cause the document to be laid before Tynwald as soon as practicable” (Legislation Act 2015 s.31). It will be interesting to see if the responsible Minister takes time to explain why it was not practicable to seek democratic approval of an emergency regulation for two months.

There is one quirk to Continuation Regulations being fitted into the Legislation Act procedure, rather than the free standing Emergency Powers Act procedure. There is a decent case for arguing that amendments made by normal EPRs persist even if rejected (Emergency Powers Act 1936 s.4(5)) – so that rejection of an EPR amending an earlier EPR does not cause the earlier EPR to revert to its older form. But continuation EPRs are governed by a slightly modified s.31 procedure. Under the Legislation Act 2015 s.31 regulations need to be approved by Tynwald at the sitting at which it is laid. If a regulation is not approved then “it ceases to have effect”. There is a clarification in the 2015 legislation as to what legislation under s.31 ceasing to have effect means: “any Manx legislation amended or repealed by the document is revived on the passing of the resolution” (s.33(1)(c)). So if Tynwald were to reject these Continuation EPRs, the law would revert to how it was when an amending EPR was last approved.