Economy, Energy and Fair Work Committee

Meeting date: Tuesday, December 18, 2018

Official Report 803KB pdf

---

European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018

---

Recognition of Professional Qualifications (Amendment etc) (EU Exit) Regulations 2018

Agenda item 3 is consideration of the Recognition of Professional Qualifications (Amendment etc) (EU Exit) Regulations 2018. We have with us Derek Mackay, Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Economy and Fair Work, who is joined by Nigel Robinson, senior policy manager on the regulation of healthcare professionals, and John Paterson, a divisional solicitor, both of whom are from the Scottish Government. I invite the cabinet secretary to make a brief opening statement before I open up the session for questions from the committee.

Now for something completely different.

I seek the committee’s agreement to consent to the UK Government legislating on our behalf on matters that intersect with devolved competence.

The regulations in question are being brought forward by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy to mitigate the worst-case scenario of withdrawal from the European Union without a deal. In the absence of the EU directive on the recognition of professional qualifications, the regulations will continue the statutory powers of competent authorities to assess and recognise the non-UK qualifications of people who wish to practise regulated professions in the UK.

The statutory instrument will maintain the crucial system of principles for the recognition of non-UK qualifications for more than 100 regulated professions. Officials have been working with their UK counterparts since February to reach agreement on the draft text, which will be available shortly, should the committee be minded to agree to consent.

12:00  

The regulations will maintain the current arrangements as closely as possible once the EU treaties cease to apply. The primary difference is that the competent authorities—usually regulatory bodies—will no longer be compelled to offer alternative routes to registration to applicants whose qualifications clearly fall well below minimum UK standards. That will not preclude competent authorities from offering such measures when they deem it to be appropriate, but it will be for them to decide.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that the impact of the change on workforce supply will be minimal, because the administrative burden of assessing non-equivalent qualifications—as well as subsequent appeals—does not reflect the low success rate of such applications. The statutory compulsion for regulators to offer temporary and occasional routes into regulated professions in the UK will also be withdrawn, because it would no longer be appropriate to offer such a facility without an alternative reciprocal agreement being in place.

The current regulations cover the social work and social services workforce, and I note that those professions have now been consolidated in the Department of Health and Social Care regulations that are before the Health and Sport Committee today.

Although the UK Government has responded to requests to move back the laying date for the instrument, I appreciate that I am nonetheless asking the committee to consider the consent notification in considerably less time than the agreed 28-day period. Given the complexity of reaching official agreement across the broad scope of the regulations, I ask for the committee’s forbearance in this instance. I am happy to answer any questions that the committee has.

Thank you, cabinet secretary.

Your introductory comments were helpful, cabinet secretary. You explained that, in effect, there will be no change, or at least any change will be very technical. However, there will be a change in relation to the temporary arrangements for people coming in and when there is a divergence between the qualifications that we would expect people to have and those that they actually have. Is it definitely right for the regulations to be category A, or should they be category B, given that we are changing a few things along the way?

We believe that the regulations should be category A, because the principles are largely the same, with the exception of what I have pointed out.

That is fair enough.

What are the main professions within devolved competence that will be affected by the statutory instrument?

Under devolved competence, teaching is the main profession of interest, but we can provide the committee with a full list of professions. As I said, the regulations on social care are going to the Health and Sport Committee.

It would be interesting to see a list.

We will provide it.

What consultation has the Scottish Government carried out with representatives from the organisations?

For teachers, we have consulted with the General Teaching Council for Scotland and, for care services, we consulted with the equivalent national body.

It was the Scottish Social Services Council.

I want to revisit the cabinet secretary’s claim that there will be very little impact on labour supply. What is that based on? Is it just based on the fact that the professions are highly regulated currently and that most people in them are British citizens?

I will turn to officials for more of the detail, but we know what affects labour and workforce supply: quite simply, it is the immigration caps or the immigration rules. That is the issue that affects supply; it is not the technical issue about whether someone’s qualification will be recognised. That will surely be tested before someone makes the decision to move. The immigration system, which includes caps, is the reason for the changes in immigration numbers.

Non-equivalent applications place a considerable administrative burden on some of the regulators, which are compelled to assess non-equivalent qualifications, regardless of how far below UK minimum standards those qualifications fall. The regulators are also compelled to offer a route of appeal, although the success rate for such applications is extremely low. Certainly, the Scottish Social Services Council was content for that avenue to be removed.

That is helpful.

The next question is from Angela Constance.

Mr Robinson has answered my question.

As there are no further questions, I thank the cabinet secretary and our other two witnesses for coming.

12:05 Meeting continued in private until 12:40.